Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 16/871,677

REACTION PREDICTION USING ONE OR MORE NEURAL NETWORKS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 11, 2020
Examiner
BLAISE, MALINA D
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
NVIDIA Corporation
OA Round
10 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
10-11
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
377 granted / 656 resolved
-12.5% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+39.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
688
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§103
44.2%
+4.2% vs TC avg
§102
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
§112
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 656 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s RCE filed 4/23/26. Claims 1, 7, 13, 19-25, 29, and 31-35 are amended. Claims 1-35 are pending. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/23/26 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication No. 2019/0355209 A1 to Sorey et al. (hereinafter “Sorey”) in view of US Publication No. 2021/0097287 A1 to Stelmar Netto et al. (hereinafter “Stelmar Netto”). Concerning claim 1, Sorey discloses one or more processors [0116], comprising: circuitry to receive, via an input device, information specifying one or more sensitivities of one or more game players; identify potentially sensitive content to be output as one or more images produced as a graphical output during gameplay of a video game based, at least in part on the one or more sensitivities; use one or more neural networks to predict one or more reactions from one or more game players to the content being displayed to the one or more game players; memory for storing network parameters for he one or more neural networks; generate one or more modified images having the potentially sensitive content modified, while maintaining interactive gameplay involving the potentially sensitive content (paragraphs [0058], [0059], [0077]-[0080], [0083], [0085], [0100], [0105], [0106], [0110] – neural networks are used to predict user reactions based on gameplay and the emotional state prediction module may be used to predict a future emotional state of the player based on a future game event which is modified before it is presented for display, modifying the aspect of the game play experience includes modifying a visual image associated with the game play experience, the system can change the game play experience (including showing visual images which are intertwined with the game) to improve a player mood based on using neural networks to predict player reactions and the system receives information specifying one or more sensitivities by capturing biometric feedback of the player). Sorey lacks specifically disclosing, however, Stelmar Netto discloses receive, via an input device, information specifying one or more sensitivities of one or more users; identify potentially sensitive content to be output as one or more images produced as a graphical output during interaction with a video, at least in part on the one or more sensitivities, predict one or more reactions from the one or more users to the potentially sensitive content, generate one or more modified images having the potentially sensitive content modified, while maintaining interactive video interaction involving the potentially sensitive content, prior to any image containing the potentially sensitive content being displayed to the one or more users; and output, via a display, the one or more modified images to the one or more users (paragraphs [0022]-[0025], [0029], [0030], [0032], [0033] [0050], [0051], [0063], [0067] – sensitivities are input into the user profile from the user identifying sensitive content and sensitivities are dynamically captured based on biometric input, user reactions are predicted, and content of the images are changed/reduced/removed prior to being displayed, changing the content to be output to a user before it is displayed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input of the triggers associated with user emotion as disclosed by Stelmar Netto in the system of Sorey in order to provide a more detailed response to a variety of emotions. Concerning claims 2, 8, 14, 20, and 26, Sorey discloses wherein the one or more neural networks include one or more detection networks to identify one or more objects or actions in the one or more images that have a predicted probability of resulting in the one or more reactions from the one or more game players (paragraphs [0058], [0059], [0077]-[0080], [0110]-[0112] – neural networks can determine actions in the images that have a probability of resulting in a reaction from the player). Concerning claims 3, 9, 15, 21, and 27, Sorey discloses wherein the one or more neural networks include a decision network to predict the one or more reactions based at least in part upon the one or more objects or actions identified by the one or more detection networks (paragraphs [0058], [0059], [0077]-[0080], [0110]-[0112] – neural networks can determine actions in the images that have a probability of resulting in a reaction from the player). Concerning claims 4, 10, 16, 22, and 28, Sorey lacks specifically disclosing, however, Stelmar Netto discloses wherein the one or more reactions relate to one or more sensitivities or phobias of the one or more game players (paragraphs [0022]-[0025], [0029], [0030] [0050], [0051], [0063], [0067]– sensitivities are input into the player profile from the player identifying sensitive content, player reactions are predicted, and content of the images are changed/reduced/removed prior to being displayed, changing the content to be output to a user in a game before it is displayed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input of the triggers associated with player emotion as disclosed by Stelmar Netto in the system of Sorey in order to provide a more detailed response to a variety of emotions. Concerning claims 5, 11, and 17, Sorey lacks specifically disclosing, however, Stelmar Netto discloses wherein the one or more circuits are further to modify one or more images rendered in the game to prevent the one or more reactions (paragraphs [0022]-[0025], [0029], [0030] [0050], [0051], [0063], [0067]– sensitivities are input into the player profile from the player identifying sensitive content, player reactions are predicted, and content of the images are changed/reduced/removed prior to being displayed, changing the content to be output to a user in a game before it is displayed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input of the triggers associated with player emotion as disclosed by Stelmar Netto in the system of Sorey in order to provide a more detailed response to a variety of emotions. Concerning claims 6, 12, 18, 24, and 30, Sorey lacks specifically disclosing, however, Stelmar Netto discloses wherein the one or more images are modified by blurring, obscuring, skipping, pausing, or providing a notification for the one or more images (paragraphs [0022]-[0025], [0029], [0030] [0050], [0051], [0063], [0067]– sensitivities are input into the player profile from the player identifying sensitive content, player reactions are predicted, and content of the images are changed/reduced/removed prior to being displayed, changing the content to be output to a user in a game before it is displayed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input of the triggers associated with player emotion as disclosed by Stelmar Netto in the system of Sorey in order to provide a more detailed response to a variety of emotions. Concerning claims 7, 13, 19, and 25, see the rejection of claim 1. Concerning claims 23 and 29, Sorey discloses wherein the one or more neural networks are further to, the game being a video game (paragraphs [0058], [0059], [0077]-[0080], [0083], [0085], [0100], [0105], [0106], [0110] – neural networks are used to predict user reactions based on gameplay and the emotional state prediction module may be used to predict a future emotional state of the player based on a future game event which is modified before it is presented for display, modifying the aspect of the game play experience includes modifying a visual image associated with the game play experience, the system can change the game play experience (including showing visual images which are intertwined with the game) to improve a player mood based on using neural networks to predict player reactions). Sorey lacks specifically disclosing, however, Stelmar Netto discloses modify the one or more images rendered in the video to prevent the one or more reactions (paragraphs [0022]-[0025], [0029], [0030] [0050], [0051], [0063], [0067]– sensitivities are input into the player profile from the player identifying sensitive content, player reactions are predicted, and content of the images are changed/reduced/removed prior to being displayed, changing the content to be output to a user in a game before it is displayed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input of the triggers associated with player emotion as disclosed by Stelmar Netto in the system of Sorey in order to provide a more detailed response to a variety of emotions. Concerning claims 31-35, Sorey discloses wherein the one or more neural networks are further to modify one or more images rendered in the video game (paragraphs [0058], [0059], [0077]-[0080], [0083], [0085], [0100], [0105], [0106], [0110] – neural networks are used to predict user reactions based on gameplay and the emotional state prediction module may be used to predict a future emotional state of the player based on a future game event which is modified before it is presented for display, modifying the aspect of the game play experience includes modifying a visual image associated with the game play experience, the system can change the game play experience (including showing visual images which are intertwined with the game) to improve a player mood based on using neural networks to predict player reactions). Sorey lacks specifically disclosing, however, Stelmar Netto discloses prior to the one or more images being displayed to the one or more users, based, at least in part, on one or more predicted reactions of the one or more users (paragraphs [0022]-[0025], [0029], [0030] [0050], [0051], [0063], [0067]– sensitivities are input into the player profile from the player identifying sensitive content, player reactions are predicted, and content of the images are changed/reduced/removed prior to being displayed, changing the content to be output to a user in a game before it is displayed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input of the triggers associated with player emotion as disclosed by Stelmar Netto in the system of Sorey in order to provide a more detailed response to a variety of emotions. Response to Arguments With respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections, Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but are moot based on the newly cited paragraphs and explanations above addressing the claim amendments. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALINA D BLAISE whose telephone number is (571)270-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. 7:00 am - 5:00 pm (PT). 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, Xuan Thai can be reached on 571-272-7147. 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. MALINA D. BLAISE Primary Examiner Art Unit 3715 /MALINA D. BLAISE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 32 earlier events
Sep 04, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 17, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Feb 24, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 23, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 29, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Aug 12, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702920
BOUNDARY DISPLAY CONTROL DEVICE, BOUNDARY DISPLAY CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAM
4y 10m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12704346
TRAINING SYSTEM
2y 2m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12700289
SOUND-BASED ATTENTIVE STATE ASSESSMENT
3y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12697552
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING MULTIPLAYER GAME SESSIONS
2y 1m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12688925
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PRESENTING FOOD INFORMATION AND COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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

10-11
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+39.4%)
3y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 656 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