Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/411,416

VISUALIZATION DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 12, 2024
Examiner
TSENG, CHENG YUAN
Art Unit
2615
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
703 granted / 835 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
865
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§103
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§102
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 835 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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. Claims 1-5, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugano (US 9,906,739) in view of Hare (US 12,426,977). Referring to claim 1, Sugano discloses a visualization device (fig. 1, system 1) comprising: a camera (fig. 1, camera 30x; fig. 3, image pickup unit 20) for obtaining a plurality of images (fig. 4, normal image signal and fluorescent image signal; fig. 5, normal image 146) during an examination of tissue (fig. 5, tissue; 9:65-10:14); and an image processing device (fig. 3, image processing device 3) to detect indicators (fig. 5, specific area 150 as in fluorescent image 147) obtained during the examination, in order to transfer the optical indicators transfer the optical indicators wherein the image processing device is to determine transformation rules (11:62-67, image processing for display; 18:19-23) based on [changes of the position of the reference structures in the plurality of images that characterize ] the plurality of images wherein the image processing device is [to detect changes of the reference structures and (see Hare)] to transfer them into the reference image (fig. 10, transfer into superimposed image 172); wherein the image processing device uses the determined transformation rules (11:62-67, image processing for display; 18:19-23) to transfer representations thereof into the reference image in a correct position (fig. 10, superimposed image 172), independent of wherein the image processing device is to display optical indicators (fig. 8, output image 169 with fluorescent image 147a) created by the examination or their graphic representations, from the reference image on an image display superimposed (fig. 10, superimposed image 172) with images captured during the treatment. Hare discloses: wherein the image processing device is to determine transformation rules (fig. 6, determine virtual reality scene; 10:40-48, change camera input) based on changes of the position of the reference structures in the plurality of images that characterize perspective changes of the plurality of images (10:35-40, surgeon change viewing camera; 7L9-15, surgeon field of view change); and wherein the image processing device is to detect changes of the reference structures (10:40-48, change camera input) and to transfer them into the reference image (fig. 6, virtual reality scene). Sugano and Hare are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor in surgical environment imaging devices. At the time of the filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of Sugano and Hare before him or her to modify the video output of Sugano to include the virtual reality device of Hare, thereafter the operator can view the surgical operation images via virtual reality device. The suggestion and/or motivation for doing so would be obtaining the advantage of improved surgical robot accuracy and surgeon’s viewing result through virtual reality device (1:60-2:19) as suggested by Hare. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Sugano with Hare to obtain the invention as specified in the application claims. As to claim 2, Sugano discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the camera is immovably arranged (fig. 1, camera 30x immovable as part of rigid scope image pickup device 10) during the obtaining of the plurality of images during the examination of the tissue. As to claim 3, Sugano discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the camera is movably supported (fig. 1, camera 30x supported by rigid scope image pickup device 10) during the obtaining of the plurality of images during the examination of the tissue. As to claim 4, Sugano discloses the device of claim 1, comprising a camera (fig. 1, camera 30x) for obtaining a plurality of images (fig. 4, image signal, fluorescent image signal) during the treatment of the tissue. As to claim 5, Sugano discloses the device of claim 4, wherein the camera for obtaining a plurality of images during the treatment of the tissue is of a same construction (fig. 1, camera 30x) as the camera for obtaining a plurality of images (fig. 4, normal image signal, fluorescent image signal) during the examination of the tissue. As to claim 10, Sugano discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the image processing device is to transfer optical indicators created by the examination of the tissue or graphic representations thereof (fig. 10, images 146/168/171) from the reference image into an image optically perceivable (fig. 10, superimposed image 172) by the treating person during the treatment based on the position of the reference structures present on the tissue (11:59-61, position shifted). As to claim 12, Hare discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the image processing device is to output optical indicators obtained by the examination or their graphic representations, from the reference image in VR-glasses (fig. 4, virtual reality display device 404) for superimposition with real images visible by the treating person, wherein the VR-glasses comprises a camera (8:24-44, VR headset) connected to the image processing device. Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugano in view of Hare and further in view Kashima (US 10,413,369). As to claim 13, Sugano/Hare discloses the device of claim 1. Kashima discloses the image processing device is to record a trace (fig. 14, resection line 191) of an influence of an instrument (fig. 14, tool 20) on the tissue during the treatment. Sugano/Hare and Kashima are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor in medical imaging device. At the time of the filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of Sugano/Hare and Kashima before him or her to modify the image pickup device with virtual reality display to include the trace of instrument influence capture of Kashima, thereafter the image pickup device is usable during surgical procedure. The suggestion and/or motivation for doing so would be obtaining the advantage of improved surgical operation environment for operator (1:65-2:5) as suggested by Kashima. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Sugano/Hare with Kashima to obtain the invention as specified in the application claims. As to claim 14, Kashima discloses the device of claim 13, wherein the image processing device is to transfer the trace recorded during the influence of the instrument on the tissue into the field of view (fig. 3, image 100) of a treating person (1:65-2:5, operator). As to claim 15, Kashima discloses the device of claim 14, wherein the image processing device is to transfer the trace (fig. 14, resection line 191) recorded during the influence of the instrument on the tissue into the field of view of a treating person (1:65-2:5, operator) corresponding to a perspective taken by the treating person or corresponding to a tissue deformation (fig. 3, affected area 101). 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

Jan 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 24, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 24, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602844
Graphics Processor
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12586285
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR MARKERLESS FACIAL MOTION CAPTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579415
Area-Efficient Convolutional Block
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572355
MODULAR ADDITION INSTRUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567173
Infant 2D Pose Estimation and Posture Detection System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 835 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