Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/098,446

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PSYCHIATRIC SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 02, 2025
Examiner
AKOGYERAM II, NICHOLAS A
Art Unit
3686
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Psychnow
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
27%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 27% of cases
27%
Career Allow Rate
47 granted / 177 resolved
-25.4% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
207
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§103
37.1%
-2.9% vs TC avg
§102
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 177 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 22, 2026 has been entered. Status of Claims Claims 1-23, as recited in an amendment filed on September 10, 2025, were previously pending and subject to a final office action filed on October 23, 2025 (the “October 23, 2025 Final Office Action”). On January 22, 2026, Applicant filed a Request for Continued Examination in accordance with 37 CFR 1.114, where Applicant amended claims 1, 16, and 21 (the “January 22, 2026 RCE”). As such, claims 1-23, as recited in the January 22, 2025 RCE, are currently pending and subject to the non-final office action below. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Greece on April 2, 2024. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Response to Applicant’s Remarks Response to Applicant’s Remarks Concerning Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 103 Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks, pp. 17-32, Section 101 Rejections and Section 103 Rejections Sections, filed January 22, 2026, with respect to rejections of: claims 1-23 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and claims 1-23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, have been fully considered, but they are moot in light of Applicant’s amendments to independent claims 1, 16, and 21. The analysis in the subject matter eligibility rejections under § 101 previously cited in the October 23, 2025 Final Office Action no longer apply to the amended claims in light of Applicant’s amendments to independent claims 1, 16, and 21. The combinations of the references previously cited in the October 23, 2025 Final Office Action, are not relied upon to teach the newly amended claim limitations in claims 1, 16, and 21. Furthermore, the updated search attached to this office action failed to generate closer prior art results. As such, the §§ 101 and 103 are hereby withdrawn in light of the amendments. However, Examiner notes that Applicant’s amendments in the January 22, 2026 RCE have introduced issues under §§112(a). Consequently, all of the rejections will be reassessed in relation to §§ 101 and 103 if the Applicant amends the claims further. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 16, and 21 recite: - "wherein the applying the anomaly detection process includes: […] analyzing the transformed one or more nodes and the transformed one or more edges to determine the outlier". While Applicant’s specification provides written description support for (i) transforming nodes, edges, and their features into a low-dimensional space [see Applicant’s specification as filed on April 2, 2025, paragraph [00186]] and (ii) “the anomaly detection process may include a vector representation that may facilitate the detection of anomalies or outliers in the data” [see Applicant’s specification as filed on April 2, 2025, paragraph [00129]], Applicant’s specification is silent as to: “analyzing the transformed one or more nodes and the transformed one or more edges to determine the outlier” (i.e., the specification does not describe the application of the anomaly detection process including analyzing one or more transformed nodes and one or more transformed edges in order to determine the outlier). Therefore, this disclosure does not provide written description support for “wherein the applying the anomaly detection process includes: […] analyzing the transformed one or more nodes and the transformed one or more edges to determine the outlier”. Matter not present on the filing date of the application in the specification, claims, or drawings that is added after the application filing is usually new matter. See MPEP §§ 2163.06 and 2163.07. These amendments (i) change the scope of the claims, and as described above, and (ii) contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventors had possession of the claimed invention. Therefore, the limitations directed to: “analyzing the transformed one or more nodes and the transformed one or more edges to determine the outlier” (as described in claims 1, 16, and 21), are deemed to be new matter, because the specification does not provide written description support for them. As such, claims 1, 16, and 21 are rejected for failing to comply with the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). Claims 2-15, 17-20, 22, and 23 (which individually depend on claims 1, 16, and 21) are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, for failing to comply with the written description requirement for similar reasons as described in the § 112(a) new matter rejections of claims 1, 16, and 21 above. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas Akogyeram II whose telephone number is (571) 272-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, between 8:00am - 5:00pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jason Dunham can be reached at (571) 272-8109. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. Official replies to this Office action may now be submitted electronically by registered users of the EFS-Web system. Information on EFS-Web tools is available on the Internet at: http://www.uspto.gov/patents/processlfi!elefslguidance/index.isp. An EFS-Web Quick-Start Guide is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/portallefslquick-start.pdf. Alternatively, official replies to this Office Action may still be submitted by any one of fax, mail, or hand delivery. Faxed replies should be directed to the central fax at (571) 273-8300. Mailed replies should be addressed to: United States Patent and Trademark Office: Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 Hand delivered responses should be brought to the United States Patent and Trademark Office Customer Service Window: Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22314-1450 /N.A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3686 /JONATHON A. SZUMNY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3686
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 02, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Aug 25, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 25, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 10, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jan 13, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 13, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592305
DRUG LIBRARY MANAGER WITH CUSTOMIZED WORKSHEETS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579904
DIGITAL MAZES IN THERAPEUTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12548657
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USING AI/ML AND TELEMEDICINE TO INTEGRATE REHABILITATION FOR A PLURALITY OF COMORBID CONDITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12512190
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DOCUMENTING EMERGENCY CARE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12512217
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIGITIZING MEDICAL DEVICES AT A PATIENT TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
27%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+29.0%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 177 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month