Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/933,334

EXPOSURE CONTROL BASED ON SCENE DEPTH

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 19, 2022
Examiner
VAZ, JANICE EZVI
Art Unit
2667
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
48 granted / 62 resolved
+15.4% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
83
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.5%
-31.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 62 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR1.17(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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 3rd, 2026 has been entered and made of record. Response to Amendment This is in response to Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed on January 29th, 2026, which has been entered and made of record. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks filed January 29th, 2026 with respect to the previous rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made within the rejection presented below. Based on these facts, THIS ACTION IS MADE NON-FINAL. Status of Claims Claims 1-7, 11-12, 15-22, 26-27 and 30 are pending. Claim(s) 1 and 16 were amended. No claims were canceled. No new claim(s) were added. Claims 1-7, 11-12, 15-22, 26-27 and 30 are considered below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-6 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Zhou (US 20200162655 A1). Regarding Claim 1, representative of Claim 16, Zhou teaches a method of processing one or more images, comprising: obtaining, at an imaging device, a first image of an environment from an image sensor of the imaging device ([0028] At step 301, an output image outputted by a depth sensor may be acquired according to current exposure parameters. In some embodiments, the depth sensor may output data from which a grayscale image may be formed. In some other embodiments, the depth sensor may output data from which a depth image may be formed); extracting features from the first image ([0030] At step 302, a depth image corresponding to the output image may be obtained when the output image is a grayscale image, [0033]: a depth sensor may be a monocular camera. In such a scenario, the processor may acquire two consecutive grayscale images outputted by the monocular camera and determine a depth image based on the two consecutive grayscale images); determining a region of interest of the first image using a depth of the features extracted from the first image, wherein the features are associated with the environment ([0037]: determine a first target region of the target object in the output image according to the depth image. The first target region is the region occupied by the target object in the output image. Hence, the region of the target object in the output image may be determined); determining a representative luma value associated with the first image based on image data in the region of interest of the first image ([0043]: at step 304, a first exposure parameter may be determined based on the brightness of the image of the target object, [0025]: after the image of the target object is identified in the output image, the brightness information on the image of the target object may be obtained); determining one or more exposure control parameters based on the representative luma value ([0043]: at step 304, a first exposure parameter may be determined based on the brightness of the image of the target object); and obtaining, at the imaging device, a second image captured based on the one or more exposure control parameters ([0043]: The first exposure parameter may be used for controlling the next automatic exposure). Regarding Claim 2, representative of Claim 17, Zhou teaches the method of claim 1. In addition, Zhou teaches wherein the one or more exposure control parameters include at least one of an exposure duration or a gain setting ([0072] In some embodiments, the exposure parameter may include at least one of an exposure time, an exposure gain, or an aperture value). Regarding Claim 3, representative of Claim 18, Zhou teaches the method of claim 1. In addition, Zhou teaches wherein determining the one or more exposure control parameters based on the representative luma value comprises ([0043]: at step 304, a first exposure parameter may be determined based on the brightness of the image of the target object): determining at least one of an exposure duration or a gain setting for the second image based on the representative luma value ([0043]: at step 304, a first exposure parameter may be determined based on the brightness of the image of the target object, [0072] In some embodiments, the exposure parameter may include at least one of an exposure time, an exposure gain, or an aperture value). Regarding Claim 4, representative of Claim 19, Zhou teaches the method of claim 1. In addition, Zhou teaches wherein determining the representative luma value based on the image data in the region of interest comprises: determining the representative luma value associated with the first image based only on the image data in the region of interest ([0043]: at step 304, a first exposure parameter may be determined based on the brightness of the image of the target object). Regarding Claim 5, representative of Claim 20, Zhou teaches the method of claim 1. In addition, Zhou teaches wherein the representative luma value is an average luma of the image data in the region of interest ([0051] Specifically, after the image of the target object is determined, the average brightness of the target object may be determined, and the first exposure parameter may be determined according to the average brightness). Regarding Claim 6, representative of Claim 21, Zhou teaches the method of claim 1. In addition, Zhou teaches wherein determining the representative luma value based on the image data in the region of interest comprises: determining the representative luma value associated with the first image based on scaling an average luma of the image data in the region of interest ([0051] Specifically, after the image of the target object is determined, the average brightness of the target object may be determined, and the first exposure parameter may be determined according to the average brightness, [0052]: a difference value between the average brightness and preset brightness may be determined. The first exposure parameter may be determined according to the difference value when the difference value is greater than or equal to a preset brightness threshold value). 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. Claim(s) 15 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (US 20200162655 A1) in view of Horesh (US 11145076 B1). Regarding Claim 15, representative of Claim 30, Zhou teaches the method of claim 1. However, Zeng does not explicitly teach the remaining limitations of Claim 15. Horesh teaches further comprising: tracking, at the imaging device, a position of the imaging device in the environment based on a location of the features in the second image ([0054]: the exposure parameter adjustment can result in an acquired image with better image information in the high weight regions compared to low weighted regions and overall better information for the specific application (e.g., SLAM)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified Zhou to include the teachings of Horesh by including a further step of tracking. Doing so would improve tracking using a secondary image by improving the exposure of the image used. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7, 11-12, 22, and 26-27 remain objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE VAZ whose telephone number is (703)756-4685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00pm. 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, Matthew Bella can be reached at (571) 272-7778. 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. /JANICE E. VAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2667 /MATTHEW C BELLA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2667
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2022
Application Filed
May 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Aug 25, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 25, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 04, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 29, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 03, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602831
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ENHANCING IMAGES USING MACHINE LEARNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602811
IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602935
DRIVING ASSISTANCE DEVICE AND DRIVING ASSISTANCE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591847
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF TRANSFORMING IMAGE DATA TO PRODUCT STORAGE FACILITY LOCATION INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591977
AUTOMATICALLY AUTHENTICATING AND INPUTTING OBJECT INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
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
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 62 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