One real reading

What a reading actually looks like

The record reader over the Non-Final Rejection and the Notice of Allowance of application 18/541,216, a public, granted Patent Center file, captured on 2026-09-30 on qwen3.5:9b running locally and printed here unedited.

Read this before the table

This is one reading, on one model, of one public file. Re-running the same reading can produce a different report, because the reader is a language model. Every quotation is checked against the text recognised from the paper's scanned pages. Verified means the words match that recognised text; not verified means they do not, usually because the model shortened a quotation with an ellipsis. Recognised text can carry scanning errors of its own, such as the run-together words in the credited limitations below, so a verified quotation is a match to the recognised text and not to the page image. The page image in the file history is the authority, and the practitioner should read it.

The reader reports what the paper says and never whether a rejection was right or an amendment needed. Nothing here is a legal determination, and it is not a substitute for a licensed practitioner's judgment.

The rejections, as the reader reported them

Each rejection in the Office action of 18/541,216, as reported by the record reader
Claims	Ground	References	Quotation, as the reader reported it
19-20	35 U.S.C. 101	none	Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter... The specification is silent to limit that such medium exclude signals. Therefore covers transitory propagating signal per se (non-statutory subject matter). See In re Nuijten... (not verified)
1-12 and 19-20	nonstatutory double patenting	U.S. Patent No. 11,847,178	Claims 1-12 and 19-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims 1-12 and 19-20 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,847,178... they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are directed to substantially the same invention. (not verified)
13-18	statutory double patenting	U.S. Patent No. 11,847,178	Claims 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 13-18 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,847,178. (verified)

A quotation marked not verified usually carries an ellipsis where the model shortened the examiner's sentence. That is the case the check exists for: the reading points you back to the paper rather than presenting a shortened sentence as the examiner's own.

The examiner's reasons for allowance

After further searches and consideration the Examiner concluded that the claimed invention has been recited in such a manner that the independent claim is not thought by any prior art of record. Independent claims 1, 13 and 19 are considered allowable since when reading the claim in light of the specification, none of the prior art of record either alone or in combination fairly disclose or suggest the combination of limitations specified in the independent claims

Verified against the paper. The limitations the reasons credit, quoted by the reader:

generating, for each concept clip of a set of concept clips, an embedding, wherein the set of concept clips corresponds to a concept searched by a user; generating a concept embedding based on the embeddings of the set of concept clips; determining a semantic relationship between the concept embedding and one or more document embeddings that each correspond to a document clip of a set of documents; and based on the determined semantic relationship, providing, for display at a client device, an indication of the semantic relationship between the concept and one or more document clips of the one or more document embeddings.

Verified.

generate, for eachconcept clip of a set of concept clips that correspond to a concept searched by a user using a machine learning model, an embedding; generate a concept embedding based on the embeddings of the set of concept clips; determine a semantic relationship between the concept embedding and one or more document embeddings that each correspond to a document clip of a set of documents; and generate a graphical user interface based on the determined semantic relationship depicting the semantic relationship between the concept and one or more document clips of the one or more document embeddings.

Verified.

generating, for each concept clip of a set of concept clips, an embedding, wherein the set of concept clips corresponds to a concept searched by a user; generating a concept embedding based on the embeddings of the set of concept clips; determining a semantic relationship betweenthe concept embedding and one or more document embeddings that each correspond to a document clip of a set of documents; and based on the determined semantic relationship, providing, for display at a client device, an indication of the semantic relationship between the concept and one or more document clips of the one or more document embeddings.

Not verified: compare with the paper.

What produced this

Model: qwen3.5:9b, running locally. Nothing left the machine.
Input: The Patent Center file history of 18/541,216, public record
Captured: 2026-09-30
Rejections reported: 3

How well the reader does across more papers was measured, on this file and one other. To run it yourself, see choosing a model for your machine or the download.

The same app, drafting

What it does with this record next

The app reads the file history in order to draft continuation claims against it. A complete drafting run, printed unedited with every defect the tool flagged in its own output, is on the sister site's sample page.