Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/272,261

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR VISUALIZING MULTI-MODAL INPUTS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Examiner
EARLES, BRYAN E
Art Unit
2625
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Apple Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
316 granted / 449 resolved
+8.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
469
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
54.9%
+14.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 449 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 filed 14 March 2026 have been fully considered. Applicant contends that the primary reference (Mulcahy) teaches shifting focus away from a hub, whereas the current claims require maintaining gaze at the UI element during the pose change. ​The Examiner notes that the current rejection has been switched to Ambrus et al. (U.S. 2015/0212576). Ambrus explicitly teaches performing a head movement while maintaining gaze on an object by utilizing the Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex (VOR). Specifically, Ambrus discloses moving head orientation away "while maintaining their gaze upon the object" [Ambrus, ¶ 0020]. Ambrus's technical detection of the VOR ensures that the gaze does not "traverse away" toward another element during the pose change [Ambrus, ¶ 0019]. Therefore, Ambrus anticipates the limitations added by the Applicant's amendment. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 45-69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0212576 to Ambrus et al. (hereinafter "Ambrus"). Regarding Claim 45 (Independent): ​Regarding Claim 45 (Amended), Ambrus discloses a method comprising: at a computing system including non-transitory memory and one or more processors, wherein the computing system is communicatively coupled to a display device and one or more input devices [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0029, 0042-0043; FIGS. 1, 2B, 7]; displaying, via the display device, a first user interface element [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0018, 0059; FIG. 4A ("selectable object")]; determining a gaze direction based on first input data from the one or more input devices [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0024, 0041, 0045]; in response to determining that the gaze direction is directed to the first user interface element, displaying, via the display device, a focus indicator with a first appearance in association with the first user interface element [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0038 ("selectable objects... may be highlighted"), 0081 ("displaying an orange border around the virtual object")]; detecting, via the one or more input devices, a change in pose of at least one of a head pose or a body pose of a user of the computing system [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0018, 0038, 0067]; and in response to detecting the change of pose, modifying the focus indicator by changing the focus indicator from the first appearance to a second appearance different from the first appearance [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0021 ("radial menu with various options"), 0064, 0071 ("opening of a virtual window")]; wherein the first user interface element is associated with performance of an operation upon selection [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0021, 0071]; the change of pose is detected while the gaze direction is maintained at the first user interface element [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0018 ("performing a particular head movement while gazing at the object"), 0020 ("maintaining their gaze upon the object")]; and wherein maintaining the gaze direction at the first user interface element comprises determining that, during the change of pose, the gaze direction remains directed to the first user interface element without traversing away from the first user interface element toward another user interface element [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0003, 0019, 0024 ("VOR... detected based on movement of a gaze vector... relative to a head vector")]. ​Ambrus utilizes the Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex (VOR), which is defined as a reflexive eye movement that "stabilizes images on the retina during head movement" to "maintain its gaze on whatever target it is imaging" [Ambrus, ¶ 0019]. By technically detecting the VOR as the head rotates, the system determines that the gaze direction remains locked on the anchor and does not traverse away toward other elements during the change in pose [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0019, 0069]. ​Regarding Claim 46: Ambrus discloses wherein the first appearance corresponds to a first position for the focus indicator and the second appearance corresponds to a second position for the focus indicator different from the first position [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0021 ("radial menu with various options"), 0023 ("adjust a location of the virtual object... moving their head")]. ​Regarding Claim 47: Ambrus discloses wherein the first appearance corresponds to a first size for the focus indicator and the second appearance corresponds to a second size for the focus indicator different from the first size [Ambrus, ¶ 0060 ("gaze region... may be enlarged to encompass... the radial menu")]. ​Regarding Claim 48: Ambrus discloses wherein the change to the focus indicator from the first appearance to the second appearance indicates a magnitude of the change in pose [Ambrus, ¶ 0067 ("particular head movement... correspond with a head speed and a degree of movement")]. ​Regarding Claim 49: Ambrus discloses wherein modifying the focus indicator includes moving the focus indicator based on a magnitude of the change in the pose [Ambrus, ¶ 0023 ("adjust a location of the virtual object... by keeping their eyes locked... and moving their head")]. ​Regarding Claim 50: Ambrus discloses wherein the movement of the focus indicator is proportional to a magnitude of the change in the pose [Ambrus, ¶ 0023 ("adjust a location... by... moving their head")]. Inherently, as the head moves a specific magnitude, the object's location is adjusted to follow. ​Regarding Claim 51: Ambrus discloses wherein the movement of the focus indicator is not proportional to the magnitude of the change in the pose [Ambrus, ¶ 0018 ("greater than a threshold head speed"), 0067]. The use of a "threshold" indicates a non-proportional trigger. ​Regarding Claim 52: Ambrus discloses wherein the focus indicator corresponds to an additional user interface element, and wherein the additional user interface element is at least one of surrounding the first user interface element, adjacent to the first user interface element, or overlaid on the first user interface element [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0059 ("radial menu 40 placed around... a selectable object"), 0066 ("displayed... surrounding the selectable object")]. ​Regarding Claim 53: Ambrus discloses determining a first pose characterization vector... and a second pose characterization vector [Ambrus, ¶ 0024 ("head vector associated with a head position and a head orientation"), 0065]. ​Regarding Claim 54: Ambrus discloses determining a displacement value between the first and second pose characterization vectors; and in accordance with a determination that the displacement value satisfies a threshold displacement metric, performing an operation [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0018 ("greater than a threshold head speed"), 0021, 0082 ("degree of head movement is greater than a particular angle")]. ​Regarding Claim 55: Ambrus discloses determining a change of the gaze direction... and ceasing display of the focus indicator [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0060 ("radial menu may be displayed as long as... [user] gazes at either the selectable object or the radial menu"), 0083]. ​Regarding Claim 56: Ambrus discloses displaying a gaze indicator associated with the gaze direction [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0038 ("highlighted border... if a gaze vector... is within a particular angle"), 0077]. ​Regarding Claim 57: Ambrus discloses the display device includes a transparent lens assembly, and wherein the first user interface element is projected [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0034 ("optical see-through HMD... via transparent lenses"), 0052 ("display optical system includes a see-through lens")]. ​Regarding Claim 58: Ambrus discloses the display device includes a near-eye system, and wherein presenting the first user interface element includes compositing [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0034, 0044 ("capture device 213 (e.g., front facing camera)")]. ​Regarding Claim 59: Ambrus discloses the first user interface element is displayed within an extended reality (XR) environment [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0001, 0003 ("augmented reality environment")]. ​Regarding Claim 60: Ambrus discloses the XR environment includes the first user interface element and at least one other user interface element [Ambrus, ¶¶ 0059 ("radial menu 40 displays various options"), 0084 ("radial menu overlaying the virtual object")]. ​Regarding Claim 61: Ambrus discloses the XR environment includes XR content... associated with performing a first operation on the XR content [Ambrus, ¶ 0018 ("opening a computing application" associated with a virtual object)]. ​Regarding Claim 62 (Independent): Claim 62 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 45. Ambrus discloses a device comprising one or more processors , a non-transitory memory , and an interface for communicating with a display and input devices performing the method limitations mapped in claim 45. ​Regarding Claims 63-65: Claims 63-65 are rejected for the same reasons as claims 46-48, respectively. ​Regarding Claim 66 (Independent): Claim 66 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 45. Ambrus discloses a non-transitory memory storing programs which, when executed by processors, cause the device to perform the method limitations mapped in claim 45. ​Regarding Claims 67-69: Claims 67-69 are rejected for the same reasons as claims 46-48, respectively. ​ Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN EARLES whose telephone number is (571)272-4628. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday at 7:30am - 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, William Boddie can be reached on 571-272-0666. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /BRYAN EARLES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 07, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Mar 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592140
USER INTERFACES FOR FACILITATING OPERATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586510
Display Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572223
CONTROLLER AND COMPUTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564752
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING TENSION OF STRING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12561015
A WRITABLE-ERASABLE MEDIUM AND A HAND HOLDABLE WRITING DEVICE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+8.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 449 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