Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/326,972

Data Recorders of Autonomous Vehicles

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 31, 2023
Priority
Jan 31, 2019 — continuation of 11/373,466 +1 more
Examiner
TSENG, CHENG YUAN
Art Unit
2615
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Lodestar Licensing Group LLC
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
6-7
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
718 granted / 854 resolved
+22.1% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
881
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
§103
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§102
37.1%
-2.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 854 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claims 2, 4-5, 9 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (US 9,041,803). Referring to claims 16, 2 and 9, Chen discloses a non-transitory computer storage medium storing instructions (7:48-53, execute instructions) which, when executed in a computing device (fig. 1, computing device 107), cause the computing device to perform a method, comprising: buffering a first portion (fig. 4, low resolution buffer data Tc-Te) of a data stream (fig. 4, data Ta-Te) associated with a first type of vehicle event (fig. 4, event 1; 6:37-51, enforcement of routine stop) into a first cyclic buffer (fig. 4, low resolution buffer 470) of the computing device, the first type of vehicle event being associated with a first duration (fig. 4, length of event 1) of a first road condition (6:37-51, law enforcement stopping for routine stop) for a vehicle (fig. 1, vehicle 110); buffering a second portion (fig. 4, high resolution buffer data Tc-Te) of the data stream associated with a second type of vehicle event (fig. 4, event 1; 6:37-51, enforcement of DWI) into a second cyclic buffer (fig. 4, high resolution buffer 450) of the computing device, the second type of vehicle event being associated with a second duration (fig. 4, length of event 1) of a second road condition (6:37-51, law enforcement stopping for DWI stop) for the vehicle; storing first data from the first cyclic buffer to a first region (fig. 5, store event to hard disk drive 530) of a non-volatile memory (fig. 1, hard disk drive 105) of the computing device based on the first data being associated with a first vehicle event (6:37-51, law enforcement stopping for routine stop) of the first type; and storing second data (fig. 5, store event to hard disk drive 530) from the second cyclic buffer to a second region (fig. 5, store event to hard disk drive 530) of the non-volatile memory, separate from the first region of the non-volatile memory, based on the second data being associated with a second vehicle event (6:37-51, law enforcement stopping for DWI) of the second type. As to claim 13, Chen discloses the device of claim 2, wherein the at least one cyclic buffer includes a first cyclic buffer (fig. 4, low resolution buffer 470) and a second cyclic buffer (fig. 4, high resolution buffer 450). As to claims 4 and 15, Chen discloses the device of claim 3, wherein the first cyclic buffer is associated with a first type of vehicle events (6:37-51, law enforcement stopping for routine stop); and the second cyclic buffer is associated with a second type of vehicle events (6:37-51, law enforcement stopping for DWI). As to claims 5 and 14, Chen discloses the device of claim 4, wherein the first cyclic buffer and the second cyclic buffer have different buffering capacities (fig. 4, low resolution data takes less storage capacity for the same event). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-8, 10-12 and 17-21 are 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claimed limitation of “stopping buffering in response to the first event type, and continue buffering in response the second event type” as required in dependent claims 6 and 10, and The claim feature of “the first type of events is to train an advanced driver assistance system, and the second type of events is to review accidents” as in dependent claim 17. Claim Interpretation This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “cyclic buffer configured to …” in claim 2. The corresponding structure is found in fig. 3 such as buffers 161/163. “logic circuit configured to …” in claim 2. The corresponding structure is found in fig. 3 such as controller 159. “first/second cyclic buffer configured to …” in claim 13. The corresponding structure is found in fig. 3 such as buffers 161/163. Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner Cheng-Yuan Tseng whose telephone number is (571)272-9772, and fax number is (571)273-9772. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 09:00 to 17:30 Eastern Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alicia Harrington can be reached on (571)272-2330. 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. 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. /CHENG YUAN TSENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 13 earlier events
Jun 10, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Jul 06, 2026
Interview Requested
Jul 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 21, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 11, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749234
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EFFICIENT TEXT-GUIDED GENERATION OF HIGH-RESOLUTION VIDEOS
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12737631
TEACHING LANGUAGE MODELS TO DRAW SKETCHES
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12737977
VIRTUAL REALITY SPECIALIZED PROCESS EQUIPMENT TRAINING SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREFOR
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12731306
INFORMATION PROVIDING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROVIDING METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12720037
Pre-Processing Immersive Video
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.5%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 854 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