Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/372,573

VIRTUAL REALITY DIGITAL TWIN OF A HOME

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 25, 2023
Examiner
MAZUMDER, TAPAS
Art Unit
2615
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
342 granted / 418 resolved
+19.8% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
434
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.3%
+10.3% vs TC avg
§102
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 418 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/11/2026 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 17 recites, wherein the VR feed further includes the improvement to the home score.. However the limitation is already claimed in parent claim 1( see last line). Therefore claim 17 doesn’t limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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) 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doken ( US patent Publication: 20240257516, “Doken”) in view of MESSERVY et al. ( US patent Publication: US 20230351067, “Messervy”) and Kaira et al. ( US patent Publication: 20140316908 , “Kaira”). Regarding claim 1, Doken teaches, A computer-implemented method (Fig. 11) of visualizing a modification proximate a structure, the method comprising: receiving, with one or more processors, image data of the structure and an indication of the modification; (steps 1108 and 1109-1110 [“0099] At 1108, the SHMS may turn on a camera of a user device (e.g., a wearable camera) of the vulnerable user. In some embodiments, once the SHMS is active on a user's device, it may continuously collect location data, and once the SHMS determines that the user is close to a hazardous object, a camera of the user device may be turned on. The SHMS may determine whether the hazardous object is in a field of view of the vulnerable user” At step 1109-1110 discloses, indication of medication is received when it is confirmed that there is a there is a hazardous object.) generating, with the one or more processors, a virtual reality (VR) feed including a virtual representation of the modification proximate the structure; ( “0101] At 1112, the SHMS may issue a household hazard AR warning to the user device (e.g., a user device of the vulnerable user) in any suitable form, e.g., image, audio, haptic, or any combination thereof. The warning may comprise an augmented reality scene that demonstrates what an accident may look like if it occurred, and/or instructions to avoid interacting with the potentially hazardous object.:” The same warning is shown VR HMD, So the AR content is a VR content.) Doken doesn’t expressly teach, calculating, with the one or more processors, an improvement to a home score associated with the structure based upon the modification; However, Messervy teaches, calculating, with one or more processors, an improvement to a home score associated with a structure based upon a modification; (“ Implementation of the suggested improvements would result in a 15% increase in home value and 130 lbs of carbon will be sequestered, as shown in FIG. 7C.”) Doken and Messervy are analogous as they are from the field of display of home improvement. Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Doken to have included the calculating, with the one or more processors, an improvement to a home score associated with the structure based upon the modification as taught by Messervy. The motivation for the modification is to provide the user an impact of modification of a structure. Doken as modified by Messervy teaches, providing, with the one or more processors, the VR feed for presentation to a user within a VR display (Doken, [0030]….“For example, the SHMS may comprise an application running at least in part on a user device (e.g., mobile device 106, smart watch or wearable device 104, smart glasses 105, a wearable camera, a smartphone, a tablet, AR glasses, AR head-mounted display (HMD), virtual reality (VR) HMD or any other suitable user device, or any combination thereof),” Fig. 3A is showing the VR feed having recommended step for modification in VR HMD 105.) , wherein the one or more processors: initially, display the structure without the modification, (Messervy, [0049]….In the example of FIG. 7A the property 80 is analyzed and the scoring algorithm 156 determines that the property needs shade trees 84, a gathering zone 82, and that the driveway is too massive 86. and subsequently, display: (i) the structure with the modification, and (ii) the improvement to the home score (“[0049}…. Implementation of the suggested improvements would result in a 15% increase in home value and 130 lbs of carbon will be sequestered, as shown in FIG. 7C.”) Messervy’s s; display of initial and subsequent image with modification with score is integrated in VR display of Doken.) Doken as modified by Messervy doesn’t expressly teach. (iii) a representation of a potential contractor for the modification. However Kaira teaches, (iii) a representation of a potential contractor for the modification. (along with project details or modification of a structure) (“[0061] Referring now to FIG. 10B, the GUI page as shown is an active project page of a service provider. In this example, an active project 1020 is displayed including the detailed project information 1021. The detailed information 1021 includes a budge set forth by a property owner when the property owner posted the project. The service provider can bid on the project to match the budge via button 1022 or alternatively, provide a best offer via button 1023. The service provider can also provide a brief description or message to the property owner in field 1024.” Fig. 10B displays roof modification image and contractor information). Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara are analogous as they are from the field of display of home improvement. Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Doken as modified by Messervy to have included (iii) a representation of a potential contractor for the modification as taught by Kiara.. The motivation for the modification is to provide user necessary information to contact the responsible bidder.. Claim 8 is directed to a system (Doken, [0076]….“The SHMS may be implemented as software or a set of executable instructions. The instructions for performing any of the embodiments discussed herein of the SHMS may be encoded on non-transitory computer-readable media (e.g., a hard drive, random-access memory on a DRAM integrated circuit, read-only memory on a BLU-RAY disk, etc.). For example, in FIG. 9, the instructions may be stored in storage 908, and executed by control circuitry 904 of a device 900.”) and its elements are similar in scope and functions of the steps of method claim 1 and therefore claim 8 is rejected with same rationales as specified in the rejection of claim 1. Claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (Doken, [0076]….“The SHMS may be implemented as software or a set of executable instructions. The instructions for performing any of the embodiments discussed herein of the SHMS may be encoded on non-transitory computer-readable media (e.g., a hard drive, random-access memory on a DRAM integrated circuit, read-only memory on a BLU-RAY disk, etc.). For example, in FIG. 9, the instructions may be stored in storage 908, and executed by control circuitry 904 of a device 900.”) and its elements are similar in scope and functions of the elements of the device claim 8 and therefore claim 15 is rejected with same rationales as specified in the rejection of claim 8. Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, wherein the image data comprises a plurality of images depicting the structure from different orientations. (Doken [0041]…..” In some embodiments, the augmented reality scene may comprise augmenting live video or other live-captured moving image, three-dimensional image, panoramic or other immersive image (e.g., a 360-degree image or series of live images surrounding a particular viewpoint), “) Regarding claim 17, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, wherein the VR feed further includes the improvement to the home score (Messervy [0049]…… Implementation of the suggested improvements would result in a 15% increase in home value and 130 lbs of carbon will be sequestered, as shown in FIG. 7C” Messervy’s s; display of subsequent image with modification with score is integrated in VR display of Doken) The motivation is to provide the user an impact of modification of a structure. Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, generating, with the one or more processors, a contractor list comprising one or more contractors who may perform the modification, wherein the VR feed further includes the contractor list. (Doken, “[0053]……Such recommendations may include at least one of purchase, installation, or maintenance service offers associated with the recommendations or advertisements included within the notifications” These maintenance service offers will have contractor information by including the teaching of adding contractor information taught by Kiara. The motivation is same as the motivation in claim 1.) Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, generating, with the one or more processors, a purchase list comprising one or more devices for implementing the modification, wherein the VR feed further includes the purchase list. (Doken, [0053]……Such recommendations may include at least one of purchase, installation, or maintenance service offers associated with the recommendations or advertisements included within the notifications”) Regarding claims 6 and 13, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, wherein the VR display comprises a VR headset. (Doken [0031]…..For example, the SHMS may comprise an application running at least in part on a user device (e.g., mobile device 106, smart watch or wearable device 104, smart glasses 105, a wearable camera, a smartphone, a tablet, AR glasses, AR head-mounted display (HMD), virtual reality (VR) HMD “) Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, generating, by the one or more processors, directions for performing the modification, wherein the VR feed further includes the directions for performing. (Doken, “[0054]….. In some embodiments, notification 326 may be provided based on preferences indicated in a user profile of a user. In some embodiments, augmented reality scene 326 may comprise images and/or video that provides instructions regarding how to install object 326.”) Regarding claim 21, Doken as modified by Messervy and Kiara teaches, (Kiara, “[0061] Referring now to FIG. 10B, the GUI page as shown is an active project page of a service provider. In this example, an active project 1020 is displayed including the detailed project information 1021. The detailed information 1021 includes a budge set forth by a property owner when the property owner posted the project. The service provider can bid on the project to match the budge via button 1022 or alternatively, provide a best offer via button 1023. The service provider can also provide a brief description or message to the property owner in field 1024.” Fig. 10B displays roof modification image, bid amount and contractor information). The motivation is same as claim 15. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 03/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 17 under 35 USC 112(d) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been maintained. Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 03/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doken ( US patent Publication: 20240257516, “Doken”) in view of MESSERVY et al. ( US patent Publication: US 20230351067, “Messervy”) and Kaira et al. ( US patent Publication: 20140316908 , “Kaira”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tapas Mazumder whose telephone number is (571)270-7466. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM PST. 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, Alicia Harrington can be reached at 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 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. /TAPAS MAZUMDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2023
Application Filed
May 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 20, 2025
Interview Requested
Aug 27, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 27, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 02, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 25, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 06, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 11, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12579763
SIGNALING POSE INFORMATION TO A SPLIT RENDERING SERVER FOR AUGMENTED REALITY COMMUNICATION SESSIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571648
GUIDANCE FOR COLLABORATIVE MAP BUILDING AND UPDATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573157
SEE-THROUGH DISPLAY METHOD AND SEE-THROUGH DISPLAY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12561916
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12555328
VIDEO PLAYING METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
82%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+16.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 418 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