Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/049,618

IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Oct 25, 2022
Examiner
KRASNIC, BERNARD
Art Unit
2671
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Fujifilm Corporation
OA Round
4 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
403 granted / 518 resolved
+15.8% vs TC avg
Strong +57% interview lift
Without
With
+57.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
534
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 518 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Response to Arguments The amendment filed 1/06/2026 have been entered and made of record. The application has pending claim(s) 1 and 4-22. In response to the amendments filed on 1/06/2026: The objections to the specification and title have been entered and therefore the Examiner withdraws the objections to the specification and title. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-10, filed 1/06/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 4-9, and 11-22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 112. Further discussions are addressed below. Claim Objections Claims 9 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9 at line 10: Due to the amendments, “third image camera” should be -- third physical camera --. Claim 9 at lines 10-11: Due to the amendments, “the plurality of cameras” should be -- the plurality of physical cameras --. Claim 19 at line 4: Due to the amendments, “the plurality of cameras” should be -- the plurality of physical cameras --. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Due to the amendments, claims 1 and 4-22 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. The Examiner has searched the entire specification and has not found any evidence that the application has support for claiming the specific steps of “replace” / “replacing” a first image … with a second image as recited in the independent claims 1, 20, and 21 respectively [claims 4-19 and 22 are dependent upon claim 1 respectively]. The originally filed disclosure only mentions “switch” / “switching” rather than replace / replacing. The scope of the two phrases are different wherein replacing (substitution) implies removing an existing item and putting a new one in its place whereas switching implies shifting from one option to another, often involving a change in state or preference. The Applicant is advised to either amend the claims further or show the Examiner clear support of possession in the specification for all the amended claim limitations with respective arguments showing and indicating that possession of such claim language is actually appropriate in terms of Written Description criteria [35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph]. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Due to the amendments, claims 1 and 4-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Re Claim 1 at line 10: Due to the amendments, the claim limitation “the plurality of images” lacks antecedent basis. Similar discussions are addressed with claim 20 at line 16-17 and claim 21 at lines 17-18 respectively. Claim 8: Due to the amendments, the claim limitation “the third image” lacks antecedent basis. The Examiner suggests “of claim 4” at line 1 to be -- of claim 7 --. Claims 4-19 and 22 are dependent upon claim 1 respectively. Claims 9-10 and 12 are dependent upon claim 8 respectively. Appropriate correction is required. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Adachi ‘560 discloses a storage unit that stores the object information, the field-of-view information, the virtual viewpoint information, and the virtual viewpoint image, and an input unit that receives a user operation; Okutani ‘633 discloses the rendering processing unit stores the second virtual viewpoint image in the image holding unit; Irie et al ‘674 discloses the storage to store the generated virtual viewpoint videos. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERNARD KRASNIC whose telephone number is (571)270-1357. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thur. and every other Friday from 8am - 4pm. 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, Vincent Rudolph can be reached on (571)272-8243. 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. /Bernard Krasnic/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2671 March 3, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 25, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 01, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jul 31, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 01, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 09, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 06, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596743
METHOD, APPARATUS, SYSTEM, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR PERFORMING IMAGE SEARCH VERIFICATION USING AN ONLINE PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591619
Content Descriptor
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12561992
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR FACILITATING CLONE SELECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12561838
METHOD AND APPARATUS WITH SENSOR CALIBRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12561364
Fool-Proofing Product Identification
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+57.1%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 518 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