Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/409,675

FAST COMPUTATION OF RFD-LIKE DESCRIPTORS IN FOUR ORIENTATIONS

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Jan 10, 2024
Priority
Jan 30, 2023 — RU 2023101901
Examiner
DULANEY, KATHLEEN YUAN
Art Unit
2666
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Smart Engines Service LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allowance Rate
508 granted / 659 resolved
+15.1% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
693
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
78.7%
+38.7% vs TC avg
§102
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 659 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . Election/Restrictions Claim 1 is allowable. The restriction requirement, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 3/18/2026 , has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn as to any claim that requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. Specifically, the restriction requirement of claims 5-7 and 9 are no longer withdrawn from consideration because the claims requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. It is noted that claims 1-19 are considered eligible subject matter. Even if the claims were considered an abstract idea to the mathematical concepts presented, the claims provide limitations regarding an improvement to another technology or field. The limitation regarding precomputing gradients, storing them in the lookup tables, and using the lookup tables to determine gradient maps to generate the local feature descriptors as claimed provide the improvement described in the specification, as seen in the abstract, to improve the speed of computations in a computer. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 3, 10, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the keypoint" in the last line. It is unclear as to which keypoint the applicant is referring to, as multiple keypoints are previously claimed. Claim 10 recites the variables “Φ” and “w1”, but does not define the variables Claim 10 recite “these” in the second to last line. It is unclear as to what “these” is referring to. Claim 11 recites the limitation “that” in the last line. It is unclear as to what “that” is referring to. Claim 14 recite the limitation “the response” in line 2. It is unclear as to which response the applicant is referring to, because multiple “a response”s are previously claimed. Claim 14 recite the variable “s” but does not define it. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 12, 13, 15-19 are allowed. Claims 3, 10, 11 and 14 would be allowable if the above rejections are overcome. Claims 1, 18 and 19 contain allowable subject matter regarding computing local feature descriptors for a plurality of keypoints on the claimed input image by computing the partial derivatives of the image pixels from the input image, determining gradient maps for each of the plurality of keypoints by performing lookups in the claimed one or more lookup tables (indexed by the claimed for each precomputed integer values of partial derivatives and storing the claimed gradient maps), using the computed partial derivatives as an index without directly computing the gradient maps from the computed partial derivatives, and generating the local feature descriptor for each of the plurality of keypoints based on the gradient maps, and outputting the image descriptor comprising the computed local feature descriptors. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN YUAN DULANEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F:9AM-5PM. 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, Emily Terrell can be reached at 5712703717. 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. /KATHLEEN Y DULANEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666 4/13/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 10, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12638668
Method and Astrophotographic Apparatus for Acquiring Images of Targets in Sky Area
3y 3m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12631569
METHOD, DEVICE, SYSTEM AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR RAPIDLY DETECTING PEST EGG IN GRAIN BASED ON PEST EGG AND PEST HOLE STRUCTURE FEATURES
3y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12620110
IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE, STEREO CAMERA DEVICE, MOBILE OBJECT, DISPARITY CALCULATING METHOD, AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD
3y 3m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12605131
A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR THE QUANTIFICATION OF CONTRAST AGENT
3y 3m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12602801
IMAGE PROCESSING CIRCUITRY AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD FOR DEPTH ESTIMATION IN A TIME-OF-FLIGHT SYSTEM
3y 1m to grant Granted Apr 14, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.7%)
3y 1m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 659 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