Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 19/376,588

REAL-TIME MASS ESTIMATION OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 31, 2025
Priority
Jun 29, 2022 — provisional 63/367,232 +1 more
Examiner
HUTCHINSON, ALAN D
Art Unit
3661
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hyroad Networks LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 6m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
411 granted / 521 resolved
+26.9% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
544
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§103
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 521 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,491,770. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the Patented claims recite “determining, based on a user input, if it is safe to perform mass estimation for the EV” and the instant claims recite more broadly “when it is determined that a persistency of excitation condition is satisfied”. As the instant application merely broadens the patented language the limitations would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. The instant claims being more broadly written than the patented claims would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-21 would be allowable if a timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) is received or if the claims are rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under Double Patenting set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious, in light of the preceding limitations, and, absent impermissible hindsight bias EV, wherein determining the estimated mass of the EV comprises: determining whether a persistency of excitation (PE) condition is satisfied; and(i) when it is determined that the PE condition is satisfied, estimating the mass based on at least the received (a) pedal inputs and (b) torque output from the electric motor; and(ii) when it is determined that the PE condition is not satisfied, determining whether it is safe to perform mass estimation via a predesigned input. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN D HUTCHINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8413. The examiner can normally be reached 7-5 Mon-Thur. 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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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. /ALAN D HUTCHINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12766974
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 2m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12762380
ADAPTIVE PREDICTION ENSEMBLE FOR MOTION FORECASTING
1y 10m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12733564
INTERROGATIVE INFERENCE SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR ADJUSTING GUIDANCE FOR GENERATIVE DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS BASED UPON INFERRING INTERROGATIVE INTENT
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12714012
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING HARVESTING IMPLEMENT FLOATATION FORCE ON AN AGRICULTURAL HARVESTER
4y 0m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12714962
METHOD FOR CALCULATING FILTER LOAD ESTIMATION, SYSTEM FOR CLEANING ENVIRONMENTAL AIR, AND VEHICLE COMPRISING SAME
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+16.8%)
2y 6m (~1y 6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 521 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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