Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/430,972

INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM AND SPEED LIMIT ACQUIRING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Feb 02, 2024
Examiner
LOUIE, WAE LENNY
Art Unit
3661
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
670 granted / 790 resolved
+32.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
808
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.3%
+7.3% vs TC avg
§102
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
§112
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 790 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Custer et al. (9,937,923). Regarding applicant claim 1, Custer discloses an information processing system applied to a vehicle, the information processing system comprising (Title, System and method for providing a speed warning and speed control; col. 1, line 59-col. 2, line 6): one or more processors configured to acquire information on a posted traffic rule that is a traffic rule indicated by a traffic sign installed on a road where the vehicle travels, acquire information on a first traffic rule applied to the vehicle, based on the posted traffic rule and a first vehicle category that is a vehicle category of the vehicle (col. 3, line 43-col. 4, line 20, “signals indicative of the image of the sign are received in the controller… to identify the at least one posted speed limit”), and notify a user of the vehicle of the first traffic rule or control travelling of the vehicle based on the first traffic rule (col. 5, lines 6-33, “notifier is a device making an audible sound when the vehicle is traveling more than the predetermined range over the posted speed limit. Warning threshold”). Regarding applicant claim 2, Custer discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to acquire the first traffic rule by correcting the posted traffic rule in accordance with the first vehicle category (col. 5, lines 6-33, “controller 20”). Regarding applicant claim 3, Custer discloses wherein the traffic rule is a speed limit; the traffic sign is a speed limit sign; the posted traffic rule is a posted speed limit that is the speed limit indicated by the speed limit sign; and the first traffic rule is a first speed limit that is the speed limit applied to the vehicle in the first vehicle category (Fig. 1, Item 26; Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 4, Custer discloses further comprising: one or more storage devices that stores a table indicating a corresponding relation between the posted traffic rule and a prescribed traffic rule beforehand prescribed for each vehicle category, wherein the one or more processors are configured to acquire, as the first traffic rule, the prescribed traffic rule that is associated with the posted traffic rule and the first vehicle category, based on the table (col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 5, Custer discloses wherein the traffic rule is a speed limit; the traffic sign is a speed limit sign; the posted traffic rule is a posted speed limit that is the speed limit indicated by the speed limit sign; the first traffic rule is a first speed limit that is the speed limit applied to the vehicle in the first vehicle category; the table indicates the corresponding relation between the posted speed limit and a prescribed speed limit beforehand prescribed for each vehicle category; and the one or more processors are configured to acquire, as the first speed limit, the prescribed speed limit that is associated with the posted speed limit and the first vehicle category, based on the table (Fig. 1, Item 26; Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”; col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 6, Cluster discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to acquire information indicating a content of a specific speed limit sign installed on the road where the vehicle travels, the specific speed limit sign being the speed limit sign with respect to a specific vehicle category, and acquire, when the specific vehicle category is not the first vehicle category, the first speed limit by converting the posted speed limit indicated by the specific speed limit sign into the prescribed speed limit with respect to the first vehicle category, based on the table (Fig. 1, Item 26; Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”; col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 7, Custer discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to acquire, as the first speed limit, the posted speed limit indicated by the specific speed limit sign when the specific vehicle category is the first vehicle category (Fig. 1, Item 26; Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”; col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 8, Custer discloses wherein the information indicating the content of the specific speed limit sign includes information on the posted speed limit indicated by the specific speed limit sign and information on the specific vehicle category (Fig. 1, Item 26; Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”; col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 9, Custer discloses wherein the specific speed limit sign is a combination of a main sign indicating the posted speed limit and an auxiliary sign indicating whether the posted speed limit is applied to the specific vehicle category; the vehicle includes an in-vehicle camera configured to image a situation around the vehicle; and the one or more processors are configured to acquire the information on the posted speed limit and the information on the specific vehicle category by recognizing the main sign and the auxiliary sign based on an image captured by the in-vehicle camera (Fig. 1, Item 26; Fig. 3, 26b, 26d, Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”; col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 10, Custer discloses a speed limit acquiring apparatus configured to acquire information on a speed limit applied to a vehicle, the speed limit acquiring apparatus comprising: one or more storage devices that stores a table indicating a corresponding relation between a posted speed limit indicated by a speed limit sign and a prescribed speed limit beforehand prescribed for each vehicle category (Title, System and method for providing a speed warning and speed control; col. 1, line 59-col. 2, line 6); and one or more processors configured to acquire information on the posted speed limit indicated by the speed limit sign installed on a road where the vehicle travels, and acquire, as a first speed limit that is the speed limit that is applied to the vehicle, the prescribed speed limit that is associated with the posted speed limit and a first vehicle category, based on the table, the first vehicle category being the vehicle category of the vehicle (col. 3, line 43-col. 4, line 20, “signals indicative of the image of the sign are received in the controller… to identify the at least one posted speed limit”). Regarding applicant claim 11, Custer discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to acquire information indicating a content of a specific speed limit sign installed on the road where the vehicle travels, the specific speed limit sign being the speed limit sign with respect to a specific vehicle category, and acquire, when the specific vehicle category is not the first vehicle category, the first speed limit by converting the posted speed limit indicated by the specific speed limit sign into the prescribed speed limit with respect to the first vehicle category, based on the table (Fig. 1, Item 26; Col. 3, lines 9-42, “camera transmits signals indicative of the image of the sign… sign indicating a speed limit”; col. 3, lines 52-col. 4, lines 22, “posted speed limits are above a predetermined threshold speed limit”). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAE LENNY LOUIE whose telephone number is (571)272-5195. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-3PM. 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, PETER D NOLAN can be reached at 571-270-7016. 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. /W.L.L/Examiner, Art Unit 3661 /PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 09, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 16, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586464
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583420
FIRE APPARATUS LEVEL INDICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565238
System and Method for Autonomously Moving a Vehicle to Safety in Response to Detected Hazards
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558935
ACTIVE VEHICLE SUSPENSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12552393
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INFERRING DRIVING CHARACTERISTIC OF A VEHICLE IN REAL-TIME
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
85%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+8.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 790 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