Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/478,174

REDUCING LATENCY IN NETWORKED GAMING BY REDUCING I-FRAME SIZES

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 29, 2023
Examiner
LANEAU, RONALD
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
1306 granted / 1483 resolved
+18.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1515
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§103
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1483 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . 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) 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dimitrova (US 6,363,380 B1). As per claim 17, Dimitrova discloses a method, comprising: receiving, over a network, at least a portion of at least a first keyframe of at least one video; receiving, over the network, signaling indicating reconstruction to apply to the portion of the keyframe; and reconstructing the portion of the keyframe based on the signaling prior to presenting the portion of the keyframe on a video display (col. 6, lines 18-37 and col. 7, lines 4-10), see fig. 1. As per claim 18, Dimitrova discloses the method of Claim 17, wherein the reconstructing comprises up-scaling the portion of the keyframe (col. 7, lines 4-10). As per claim 19, Dimitrova discloses the method of Claim 17, wherein the reconstructing comprises processing the portion of the keyframe using at least one sharpening filter. As per claim 20, Dimitrova discloses the method of Claim 17, wherein the reconstructing comprises reorienting the portion of the keyframe (col. 7, lines 4-10). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-16 are allowed. None of the references, either singularly or in combination, discloses or even suggest: As per claims 1-9, an apparatus comprising: determine whether an intraframe (I-frame) of a video is associated with a region of interest of the video; responsive to the condition and the determination of whether the I-frame of the video is associated with the regio of interest of the video, reduce a size of I-frame of the video; and send the I-frame and at least one non-I-frame to a transmitter for transmission over the network. As per claims 10-16, an apparatus comprising: reduce a first portion of video prior to encoding using at least a first filtering parameter, the reducing based on an intraframe (I-frame) of the video being associated with a region of interest of the video; reduce a second portion of the video prior to encoding using at least a second filtering parameter not used to reduce the first portion; and transmit the portions over a network to at least one receiver. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed on 12/02/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant fails to address the rejection of claim 17 and as a result the rejection stands. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RONALD LANEAU whose telephone number is (571)272-6784. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6-4:30 ET. 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, David Lewis can be reached at 571-272-7673. 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. /Ronald Laneau/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 29, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 02, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Final Rejection — §102
Mar 05, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597319
GAMING DEVICE WITH PERSISTENCE CYCLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586444
COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPLEMENTING MATRIX-BASED ONLINE GAMING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586437
CONTROLLING POWER CONSUMPTION IN GRAPHICS COMPONENTS OF GAMING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586443
MODIFYING PROGRESSIVE AWARD PARAMETERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586438
LIGHTED GAMING TABLE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+9.8%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1483 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