Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/383,435

Print On Demand

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 24, 2023
Examiner
HARTMAN JR, RONALD D
Art Unit
2119
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Sky Castle Studios LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
628 granted / 702 resolved
+34.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
737
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.5%
-25.5% vs TC avg
§103
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
§102
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§112
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 702 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 Objections Claim 10, change the dependency to claim 9, not claim 29. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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 11-14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Alivandi, US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0287065 A1 (hereinafter: ‘065). As per claim 11, ‘065 discloses a method comprising: rendering a 3-dimensional (3D) character to generate a rendered character piece (e.g., See ‘065; [0080] and [0085]); rendering a scene to generate a rendered scene (e.g., See ‘065; [0003] and [0013]); and combining the rendered scene and the rendered character piece to generate a combination (e.g., See ‘065; [0013]). As per claim 12, ‘065 further discloses generating a game piece based on the combination (e.g., See ‘065; [0069]). As per claim 13, ‘065 further discloses that the game piece is a 2-dimensional (2D) character sheet (e.g., See ‘065; [0059]). As per claim 14, ‘065 further discloses that the game piece is a 2-dimensional (2D) playing card (e.g., See ’065; [0069]). As per claim 17, ‘065 further discloses generating at least one image based on a 3-dimensional (3D) model, wherein the at least one image is a component of the rendered character piece (e.g., See ‘065; [0069] and [0088). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alivandi, US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0287065 A1 (hereinafter: ‘065) in view of Amadio et al., US Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0277661 A1 (hereinafter: ‘661). As per claim 1, ‘065’s combined system (‘065 in view of ‘661) discloses an apparatus (e.g., See ‘065; [0002]) comprising: a processor (e.g., processor; See ‘065; [0017] and [0021]) configured to: a) render a 3-dimensional (3D) character to generate a rendered character piece (e.g., See ‘065; [0080] and [0088]); b) render a scene to generate a rendered scene (e.g., See ‘065; [0013]); and c) combine the rendered scene and the rendered character piece to generate a combination (e.g., See ‘065; [0013]); and a memory coupled to the processor, the memory configured to store data of the scene, the rendered scene, the 3D character and the rendered character piece; and an interconnection data bus coupling the processor to the memory (e.g., ‘065 discloses storing character and scene data and making rendered image files; See ‘065; [0014], [0069] and [0078] – [0080]; further, ‘661 discloses a typical computer having a processor and memory that are connected via a system bus; See ‘661; [0085]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘661 into ‘065 for the purpose of using a standard, reliable computer setup (CPU, memory and bus) so that the rendering occurs quicker, smoother and the resultant data can be easily stored for later retrieval thereby adding convenience of being able to have many different character/scenes to choose from. As per claim 2, ‘065’s combined system (‘065 in view of ‘661) further discloses a printer configured to generate a game piece based on the combination (e.g., See ‘065; [0019] for disclosing a printer; also see ‘661’; [0085], [0087] and [0069] for disclosing the printer coupled to the processor and the printer generating a game piece). As per claim 3, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the printer is a 2-dimensional (2D) printer and the 3. game piece is a 2-dimensional (2D) character sheet (e.g., See ‘065; [0014] and [0091]). As per claim 4, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the printer is further coupled to the memory (e.g., See ‘661; [0085] and [0087]). As per claim 5, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the printer is coupled to the memory and the processor via the data bus (e.g., See ‘661; [0085] and [0087]). As per claim 6, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the printer is a 2-dimensional (2D) printer and the game piece is a 2-dimensional (2D) playing card (e.g., See ‘065; [0069] and [0091]). As per claim 7, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the printer is a 3-dimensional (3D) printer and the game piece is a 3-dimensional (3D) template (e.g., See ‘065; [0072] and [0092]; also see ‘661; [0029] – [0030]). As per claim 8, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the 3D template is created from a 3-dimensional (3D) printable mesh and color format processed from the 3-dimensional (3D) character (e.g., See ‘065; [0079], [0080] and [0085]; also see ‘661; [0031] and [0065]). Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alivandi, US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0287065 A1 (hereinafter: ‘065) in view of Teng et al., US 2012/0242679 A1 (hereinafter: ‘679). As per claim 9, ‘065’s combined system (‘065 in view of ‘679) discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer executable code, operable on a device comprising at least one processor and at least one memory coupled to the at least one processor (e.g., ‘065 discloses the utilization of a game client or program; [0010], and graphics software for rendering/conversion; [0088]; also ‘679 discloses a computing device with CPU and memories coupled via a bus, where the CPU executes a program from memory; See [0052], [0063] and [0064]), wherein the at least one processor is configured to implement printing a game piece (e.g., See ‘065; [0069]; also see ‘679; [0063]), the computer executable code comprising: instructions for causing a computer to render a 3-dimensional (3D) character to generate a rendered character piece (e.g., See ‘065; [0080] and [0088]; also see ‘679; [0038]); instructions for causing the computer to render a scene to generate a rendered scene (e.g., See ‘065; [0013]; also see ‘679; [0003] and [0038]); instructions for causing the computer to combine the rendered scene and the rendered character piece to generate a combination (e.g., See ‘065; [0013]; also see ‘679; [0038] and [0064]); and instructions for causing the computer to generate a game piece based on the combination (e.g., See ‘065; [0013] and [0069]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘679 into ‘065 for the purpose of improving speed and consistency of rendering images on common computer hardware, thereby reducing errors, and reliably generating printable images for game pieces. As per claim 10, ‘065’s combined system further discloses the computer to use a rendering equation for the rendering the 3D character, wherein the rendering equation defines a mapping from an incident radiance Rᵢ to an output radiance R₀ using an integral transform equation and a kernel function (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to using a light math equation to turn incoming light into the rendered character image; See ‘679; [0005]). Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alivandi, US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0287065 A1 (hereinafter: ‘065), as applied to claim 11, from above, in view of Amadio et al., US Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0277661 A1 (hereinafter: ‘661). As per claim 15, ‘065 does not specifically disclose generating a 3-dimensional (3D) template as a game piece, wherein the generating is based on the combination and uses a 3-dimensional (3D) printable mesh and a color format processed from the 3-dimensional (3D) character. In analogous art, ‘661 discloses this feature (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to making a 3D printable, colored model game piece from the combined character and scene result; See ‘065; [0013, [0080] and [0085]; also see ‘661; [0065] and [0067]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘661 into ‘065 for the purpose of turning the character data into a print ready, full color 3D model so a user could make a better, more realistic 3D game piece. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alivandi, US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0287065 A1 (hereinafter: ‘065), as applied to claim 11, from above, in view of Sheblak et al., US Patent Application Publication No. US 2011/0306417 A1 (hereinafter: ‘417). As per claim 16, ‘065 does not specifically disclose generating at least one image based on a 2-dimensional (2D) model, wherein the at least one image is a component of the rendered character piece. In analogous art, ‘417 discloses this feature (e.g., See ‘417; [0013] and [0049]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘417 into ‘065 for the purpose of using 2D models to render the character faster, thereby saving processing power and memory resources, while still generating the required character image optimally. Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alivandi, US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0287065 A1 (hereinafter: ‘065), as applied to claim 11, from above, in view of Teng et al., US 2012/0242679 A1 (hereinafter: ‘679). As per claim 18, ‘065 does not specifically disclose that the rendering equation defines a mapping from an incident radiance Rᵢ to an output radiance Ro using an integral transform equation. In analogous art, ‘679 discloses this feature (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to using a light math equation to turn incoming light into the rendered character image; See ‘679; [0005]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘679 into ‘065 for the purpose of using a well-known, accurate lighting method to make the rendered character look more realistic and visually correct. As per claim 19, ‘065’s combined system further discloses the rendering equation is an integral transform of the incident radiance Rᵢ to the output radiance R₀ using a kernel function (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to using an integral with a weighting function; See ‘679; [0005]). As per claim 20, ‘065’s combined system further discloses that the kernel function is a bidirectional reflectance 20 distribution function (BRDF) (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the light integral being the surface reflectance function; See ‘679; [0005]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 21 and 22 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. References Considered but Not Relied Upon The following additional references were considered but were not relied upon with respect to any prior art rejections: (1) US 9,256,861 B2, which discloses automatically building a trading card style image of an avatar, including the avatar picture being placed over a chosen background or wallpaper; (2) US 11,080,922 B2, which discloses picking an object in a virtual world and turning it into a 3D printable model by sampling points and building a printable surface; (3) US 2024/0331249 A1, which discloses a system allowing a user to create a virtual character and sending a request to 3D print that character using a printer service; (4) US 9,582,848 B2, which discloses using 2D images inside 3D scenes so characters and effects can be rendered efficiently; and (5) US 6,016,150 A, which discloses building a final picture by combining multiple image layers (character and lighting) using a compositor to make one output image. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD D HARTMAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3684. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 4:30 EST. 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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at (571) 272-4105. 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. /RONALD D HARTMAN JR/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119 December 19, 2025; /RDH/
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 24, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594524
System and Method for Concentrating Gas
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591228
System for Adjusting Gap Step and Method of Operating Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591213
INTELLIGENT WARM-UP METHOD OF MACHINE TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589430
Method for automated pass schedule calculation in forging stepped shafts
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583055
AN IMPROVED AUTOMATED PORTABLE FRICTION WELDING SYSTEM AND METHOD OF OPERATIO
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+2.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 702 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