Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/400,801

INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 29, 2023
Examiner
VU, TOAN H
Art Unit
2178
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Gree, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
329 granted / 428 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
438
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
§112
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 428 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
fThe present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . DETAILED ACTION This communication is responsive to the application filed on 12/29/2025. Claims 1-22 are pending in this application. This action is made non-final. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy has been placed in file. Foreign Priority Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application. 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 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 1-3, 5-6, 13-15, 17 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rhyoo et al. (US 2020/0360809; Hereinafter Rhyoo). Re claims 1 and 21-22, Rhyoo teaches an information processing system for processing information between a user terminal and a server device (fig. 1A, gamer server and terminal), the system comprising: at least one processor programmed to: cause a display screen to be displayed that includes a first screen that displays a first character object of a user of the user terminal (fig. 2 and [0046]-[0049], a game character 210 is displayed on the first display of the terminal 120), and a second screen that selectably displays one or more game media that can be attached to the first character object (fig. 6 and [0050]-[0054], rotate the viewpoint or the viewing angle of the game character 510 based on a drag direction on the second display); receive, from the user terminal, a selection instruction selecting at least one game medium from among the one or more game media (fig. 6 and [0051], rotate the viewpoint or the viewing angle of the game character 510 based on a drag direction on the second display); and consume a predetermined number of specific game media held by the user based on the received selection instruction (figs. 4-6 and [0046]-[0051], user interacts with a game), and store the selected at least one game medium in association with the user and the first character object ([0081], the controller 1420 may automatically store a state of the game played in the first display 1410). Re claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein the at least one processor is further programmed to determine whether a held number of the specific game media held by the user is sufficient (figs. 4-6, user interacts with a game), and store the selected at least one game medium in association with the user and the first character object when the held number is determined to be sufficient ([0081], the controller 1420 may automatically store a state of the game played in the first display 1410). Re claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein the user is a distributing user of a video distributed in a manner viewable by a viewing user of the video, the video including the first and second screens (figs. 4-6 and [0046]-[0500], user selects a game to be displayed on the first and second display). Re claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein the at least one processor determines the one or more game media to be displayed on the second screen according to an attribute of the first character object that is displayed on the first screen (figs. 8-9 and numerals 810-820). Re claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein the at least one processor is further programmed to change the first character object displayed on the first screen to a second character object of the user according to an operation of the user (figs. 8-10 and [0053], when the game user drags to a position 920 in the clockwise direction and stops dragging or when a touch disappears at the position 920, the terminal 120 may replace the equipment 820 with equipment 2 based on setting information 1000 of FIG. 10 that is provided in advance). Re claim 13, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein at least one processor is further programmed to receive selection of at least one attribute from among a plurality of attributes provided for the selected at least one game medium (fig. 9 and [0053]-[0055], game user interact with displayed selection). Re claim 14, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein in response to receiving the selection instruction, the at least one processor causes the selected at least one game medium to be displayed as attached to the first character object displayed on the first screen (fig.13 and [0059]-[0064], in response to a user input to the second display while game play is in progress through the first display, the terminal 120 displays a result corresponding to the user input on the first display). Re claim 15, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein in response to the selected at least one game medium including multiple game media, the at least one processor switches display of attachment of the multiple game media according to a movement of the user or an operation of the user (fig.13 and [0059]-[0064], in response to a user input to the second display while game play is in progress through the first display, the terminal 120 displays a result corresponding to the user input on the first display). Re claim 17, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein the at least one processor is further programmed to cause to be displayed a still image or a video related to the first character object separately from the first character object displayed on the first screen (figs. 4-8, displaying image and option for game user to perform. Also see fig. 13 and [0059]-[0064], in response to a user input to the second display while game play is in progress through the first display, the terminal 120 displays a result corresponding to the user input on the first display). 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 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 of this title, 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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rhyoo in view of Kamiya (US 2016/0030846). Re claim 18, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Rhyoo teaches wherein the at least one processor stores the selected at least one game medium in association with the user and the first character object with a restriction ([0013], storage medium may store instructions to cause the processor to perform) but Rhyoo does not explicitly teach based on the selection instruction and a restriction instruction. However, it is taught by Kamiya ([0016], generation of a game screen is based on or restricted to such conditions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching as seen in Kamiya’s content into Rhyoo’s invention because it would provide user an enhanced ability to generate and display the correct environment for a specific game. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 7-12, 16, and 19-20 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 set forth in this action. Conclusion The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 ( c ) to consider these references fully when responding to this action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOAN H VU whose telephone number is (571)270-3482. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP 9-5:30 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Hong can be reached on 571-272-4124. 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. /TOAN H VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 21, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 03, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593969
3D SCANNER SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING FEEDBACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592014
MEDIA CONTENT PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585371
Display Control Method and Apparatus for Pointer in Window, Device, and Storage Medium
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572730
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING ACCESSIBLE INTERFACE CONTENT USING A MACHINE LEARNING FRAMEWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12554514
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENHANCED GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE INFORMATION TRACKING
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.0%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 428 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month