Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/473,164

DIGITAL IMAGE SUB-DIVISION AND ANALYSIS FOR NEIGHBORING SUB-IMAGE IDENTIFICATION

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 22, 2023
Examiner
CHEN, FRANK S
Art Unit
2611
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 12m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
539 granted / 657 resolved
+20.0% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+32.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
681
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§103
56.0%
+16.0% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 657 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. 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 2. 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. 3. Claims 1-8 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. 4. Claim 1 recites the limitation a second set of intrinsic and/or extrinsic parameters in lines 10-11 and further recites the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters in line 15. Claim 1 interpretation allows for only a second set of intrinsic parameters or for only a second set of extrinsic parameters, which causes the limitation the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters at line 15 to lack antecedent basis because it requires both second sets of intrinsic and extrinsic parameters to occur. If and/or at line 11 is interpreted to be just and, line 15 provides proper antecedent basis, but if and/or at line 11 is interpreted to be just or, then line 15 lacks antecedent basis. Examiner suggests to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection by amending line 10-11 to recite “a second set of intrinsic and extrinsic parameters” instead of the current a second set of intrinsic and/or extrinsic parameters. Allowable Subject Matter 5. Claims 1-20 are allowed over cited references. 6. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 1 recites the limitation sub-dividing the first digital image into a first plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the first plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the first set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the first digital image and sub-dividing the second digital image into a second plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the second plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the second digital image which are neither disclosed nor suggested by the cited references, either singly or in combination. 7. A close art is Porter et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0098130 A1). Porter discloses correcting/adjusting extrinsic camera parameters for image projection but makes no mention of modifying or synthesizing intrinsic camera parameters and certainly is silent with respect to mapping synthesized intrinsic and extrinsic parameters to sub-divided images. 8. Another close art is David Nilosek (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0124975 A1). Nilosek at paragraph [0003] discloses “[i]n a traditional aerial survey system, camera pose data describes intrinsic (interior) and extrinsic (exterior) parameters of the camera(s). Intrinsic parameters include focal length, principal point, radial distortion, and other parameters describing the camera used to capture the image. Extrinsic parameters typically define the 3D position and pose of a camera for each frame, for example, using six parameters (x, y, and z absolute position parameters; and ω, ϕ and κ rotational (pose) parameters). The six parameters for the frames captured during a survey are usually bundle adjusted as part of an aerial triangulation process in order to produce a refined solution for the parameters to an acceptable error threshold, typically using a reprojection error of 3D object space tie points and their corresponding observed features in image space. In performing aerial triangularization, any errors with the camera pose data can cause errors in determining the three-dimensional location of the feature points. Thus, it is desirable for the camera pose data to be as accurate as possible.” However, this is the not same as sub-dividing the first digital image into a first plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the first plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the first set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the first digital image and sub-dividing the second digital image into a second plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the second plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the second digital image because there is no disclosure nor suggestion of mapping the 6 parameters of the camera onto to subdivided images from original parameters. 9. Another close art is Jin et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0206584 A1). While Jin discloses intrinsic and extrinsic camera parameters, Jin fails to disclose nor suggest sub-dividing the first digital image into a first plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the first plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the first set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the first digital image and sub-dividing the second digital image into a second plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the second plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the second digital image. 10. Another close art is Justus et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0327722 A1) which at paragraph [0026] discloses “[t]he systems and methods of the present disclosure do not require a modeler (e.g., a user) to determine the aforementioned roof structure geometries and features thereof, and can be refined by a user to increase an accuracy of a roof structure shape determination. Additionally, the algorithm utilizes camera parameters to determine an image crop of a building of interest present in a nadir aerial image and does not utilize the camera parameters to determine a shape of a roof structure associated with the building” but this is not same as sub-dividing the first digital image into a first plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the first plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the first set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the first digital image and sub-dividing the second digital image into a second plurality of sub-images, each sub-image of the second plurality of sub-images having a corresponding set of synthesized intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters that are mapped from the second set of intrinsic parameters and extrinsic parameters of the real camera that captured the second digital image. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” CONTACT Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK S CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7993. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8-11:30 and 1:30-6. 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, Kee Tung can be reached at 5712727794. 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. /FRANK S CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 22, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597111
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DULL GRADING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596007
DISPLAY CONTROL APPARATUS, DISPLAY SYSTEM, DISPLAY METHOD, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592029
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MEDIA CONTENT GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586308
GENERATING OBJECT REPRESENTATIONS USING NEURAL NETWORKS FOR AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586293
SCENE RECONSTRUCTION FROM MONOCULAR VIDEO
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+32.7%)
1y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 657 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