Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 17/752,807

METHODS OF CAPTURING IMAGES AND MAKING GARMENTS

Final Rejection §112§Other
Filed
May 24, 2022
Priority
Dec 23, 2014 — provisional 62/096,517 +3 more
Examiner
THIRUGNANAM, GANDHI
Art Unit
2672
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Bit Body Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
421 granted / 570 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
606
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
70.8%
+30.8% vs TC avg
§102
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 570 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §Other
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The Examiner acknowledges the Penn Declaration. Regarding paragraph 7 of the Declaration. The Examiner acknowledges that the supplemental drawings at least suggests support for the amended claim subject matter. The issue is that The Supplemental drawings are not part of the original filing. Claims must be supported by the original disclosure. Response to Amendment The declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 filed 3/11/2026 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-20 based upon 35 USC 112 1st as set forth in the last Office action because: *Expresses Opinions and fails to set forth facts *Showing is not commensurate in scope with the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-24 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. Claim 1 recites “wherein the optimal angle comprises an angle between the camera and the same plane that the individual is standing on, and wherein the optimal angle is based at least in part on: (i) a height of the individual, and (ii) a field of view of the camera”. This limitation is not supported by the original disclosure. Paragraph 27 specifically states “[0027] In one embodiment, the optimal angle of the camera is about 65 to 80 degrees. In one embodiment, the optimal angle of the camera is about 60 to 75 degrees. In another embodiment, the optimal angle of the camera is chosen to minimize the distance between the camera and the subject while including the entire subject in the image. In one embodiment, the optimal angle of the camera is chosen to minimize the distance between the camera and the subject while including the entire subject in the image and also providing a buffer along the edges of the image frame.” . Paragraph 34 discloses “[0034] In another embodiment, identifying the height of the subject comprises accepting user input, either by capturing numerical information, for example, by voice or keypad input.”. Paragraph 36 discloses “the distance from the camera is set by accounting for the field of view of the camera, in order to include the subject's entire body, so that no part of the subject's body is out of the frame.” The Examiner acknowledges that Height and field of view are captured. But there is no disclosure that it is used to determine the optimal angle. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figures 1A, 1B, 1C. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The amendment filed 03/11/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: Supplemental Drawings 1A,1B,1C Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. No Prior Art reads on the claims as currently written. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GANDHI THIRUGNANAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3261. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5PM. 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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached at 571-272-3638. 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. /GANDHI THIRUGNANAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2672
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 5 earlier events
May 15, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §112, §Other
Aug 08, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 14, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112, §Other
Jan 28, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 11, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112, §Other (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12681183
EFFICIENT K-NEAREST NEIGHBOR (KNN) METHOD FOR SINGLE-FRAME POINT CLOUD OF LIDAR, AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12670710
Method and apparatus for using transfer learning to locate igneous carbonate rock-type rare earth deposits
3y 1m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12657703
METHOD FOR CORRECTING IMAGE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12651349
IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS
3y 2m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12651334
CAROTID PLAQUE SEGMENTATION USING TRAINED NEURAL NETWORK
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 570 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