Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/192,538

Interactive Reading System

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 29, 2023
Examiner
BLAISE, MALINA D
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
International Publishing Services Pty Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
364 granted / 635 resolved
-12.7% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+39.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
673
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
§112
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 635 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 . 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. Claim(s) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication No. 2018/0364976 A1 to Stone (hereinafter “Stone”) in view of US Publication No. 2016/0063876 A1 to Javidan et al. (hereinafter “Javidan”). Concerning claim 1, Stone discloses an interactive reading system (Abstract) comprising: a book having a first book cover and a second book cover, the first book cover is located opposite to the second book cover (Figs. 1 and 2, paragraph [0034]); a plurality of pages located between the first and the second book covers (Figs. 1 and 2, paragraph [0034]); an interactive reading system integrated into a cavity located on the book cover (Figs. 1 and 2, paragraph [0035]); wherein the interactive reading system comprises a housing having on a first side: a control module (paragraphs [0084]-[0086]); a keyboard connected to the control module (paragraphs [0053]-[0059]); a memory connected to the control module (paragraph [0049]); wherein the housing comprises on a second side (paragraph [0034]): a speaker connected to the control module for playing the recorded audio messages (paragraphs [0035], [0048]); a compartment adapted to house batteries (Fig. 4, paragraph [0048]); a headphone connected to the control module (paragraph [0015]); wherein the device enabled for receiving, storing, and playing audio information (paragraphs [0076]-[0078], [0086]). Stone lacks specifically disclosing, however, Javidan discloses an audio input device connected to the control module for recording the audio messages (paragraphs [0031], [0048], [0085], [0100], [0118]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the audio input as disclosed by Javidan in the system of Stone in order to create a more interactive system, thereby increasing user interest. Concerning claim 2, Stone lacks specifically disclosing, however, Javidan discloses wherein the audio input device is a microphone (paragraphs [0031], [0048], [0085], [0100], [0118]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the audio input as disclosed by Javidan in the system of Stone in order to create a more interactive system, thereby increasing user interest. Concerning claim 3, Stone discloses wherein the book pages include a touching interactive region (paragraphs [0053]-[0059]). Concerning claim 4, Stone discloses wherein the plurality of pages of the book includes text and images (paragraphs [0011], [0055]). Claim(s) 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone, Javidan, and further in view of US Publication No. 2016/0343264 A1 to Murdock et al. (hereinafter “Murdock”). Concerning claim 5, Stone lacks disclosing, however, Murdock discloses wherein the keyboard is a touch screen (paragraphs [0024], [0039]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the input as disclosed by Murdock in the system of Stone in order to create a more interactive system, thereby increasing user interest. Concerning claim 6, Stone lacks disclosing, however, Murdock discloses further including a visual recording device (paragraphs [0034], [0035]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the recording device as disclosed by Murdock in the system of Stone in order to create a more interactive system, thereby increasing user interest. Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone, Javidan, and further in view of US Publication No. 2022/0375359 A1 to Lewis et al. (hereinafter “Lewis”). Concerning claim 7, Stone lacks specifically disclosing, however, Lewis discloses wherein a password is required to access the system (Figs. 26a-26c, column 40, line 39 – column 42, line 17). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the password security as disclosed by Lewis in the system of Stone in order to create a more secure system. Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone, Javidan, Lewis, and further in view of US Publication No. 2010/0248204 A1 to Meyering (hereinafter “Meyering”). Concerning claim 8, Stone discloses a method for recording a reading audio of a text taken from a book and then playing back the recorded message to a further user (paragraphs [0076]-[0078], [0086]), the method comprising the steps of: (see the rejection of claim 1). Stone lacks disclosing, however, Javidan discloses selecting a page number on the book to start reading the book by using the required key on the keyboard; starting to read the text on the selected page (paragraphs [0031], [0043]-[0048], [0055], [0085], [0100], [0118]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the audio input as disclosed by Javidan in the system of Stone in order to create a more interactive system, thereby increasing user interest. Stone lacks disclosing, however, Lewis discloses entering a password through the keyboard (Figs. 26a-26c, column 40, line 39 – column 42, line 17). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the password security as disclosed by Lewis in the system of Stone in order to create a more secure system. Stone lacks disclosing, however, Meyering discloses, recording the reading text by pressing an enter key on the keyboard; once the recording step is finished, pressing the enter key to save the recorded reading text in the memory; and pressing the play key to enter the desired page number to retry the recorded message, to select a recording mode (Fig. 4, paragraph [0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention incorporate the audio input as disclosed by Meyering in the system of Stone in order to create a more interactive system, thereby increasing user interest. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed in the PTO-892. 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 at 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

Mar 29, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582920
TOY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12573269
INFORMATION PROCESSOR AND GAME CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558613
Control Method and Electronic Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12551792
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GAMIFICATION IN A METAVERSE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12544665
COMPUTER SYSTEM, GAME SYSTEM, AND REPLACEMENT PLAY EXECUTION CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
57%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+39.6%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 635 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