Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/460,123

ASSOCIATION OF BOTTOM-UP KEYPOINTS BASED ON BOUNDING BOX EXTENTS

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Sep 01, 2023
Examiner
BARBEE, MANUEL L
Art Unit
2857
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
GM Cruise Holdings LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
747 granted / 913 resolved
+13.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
943
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§103
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 913 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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 1-3 and 6-22 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 1 recites the limitation "the one or more vehicle keypoints" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation appears to be part of amending claim 1 to incorporate the limitations of original claims 3 and 4 into claim 1. Claim 1 has limitations for “associating, …, one or more vehicle key points from the plurality of keypoints with the bounding box corresponding to the at least one vehicle” later in claim 1, which were also in original claim 1. Claim 1 may be amended to clearly show when “the one or more vehicle keypoints from the plurality of vehicle key points” is first introduced and its relationship to the associating step. Further, the claims should be consistent in referring to “keypoints” or “key points”. Claims 2, 3, 6-9, 21 and 22 depend from claim 1 and are rejected for the same reason. Independent claim 10 and its dependent claims 11-16, and independent claim 17 and its dependent claims 18-20 recite similar indefinite language and are rejected for the same reason. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 13, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 13 and 14 recite limitations that were incorporated into independent claim 10. Similarly, claim 19 recites limitations that have been incorporated into independent claim 17. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Response to Arguments Applicant’s claim amendments and arguments, see pages 10-12, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to claims 1-3, 6-12, 15-18 and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-3, 6-12, 15-18 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s claim amendments and arguments, see pages 12-13, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to claims 1-3, 6-12, 15-18 and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 of 1-3, 6-12, 15-18 and 20 has been withdrawn. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL L BARBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5:30.. 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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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. /MANUEL L BARBEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 01, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jan 15, 2026
Interview Requested
Jan 21, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 21, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 27, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Apr 08, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596364
DATA ANALYTICS FOR PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596351
SYSTEMS, APPARATUS, AND METHODS FOR ADJUSTING PARAMETERS IN RESPONSE TO ANTICIPATED COMPONENT STATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591019
METHOD FOR GENERATING ELECTROCHEMICAL IMPEDANCE SPECTROSCOPY OF BATTERY, MEDIUM, AND COMPUTER DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584821
SENSOR NETWORK-BASED ANALYSIS AND/OR PREDICTION METHOD, AND REMOTE MONITORING SENSOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569200
ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR PROVIDING BIOMETRIC INFORMATION AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
82%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+14.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 913 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