Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/490,827

INFORMATION PROVIDING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROVIDING METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 20, 2023
Examiner
TSENG, CHENG YUAN
Art Unit
2615
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Panasonic Holdings Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
703 granted / 835 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
865
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
§103
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§102
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 835 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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 1-2, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pondicherry (US 11,687,827) in view of Huang (US 6,766.056). Referring to claims 1, 18 and 20, Pondicherry discloses an information providing device (fig. 1, system 100) comprising: an extractor (fig. 1, extractor 110/130) that extracts 1) identification information (fig. 1, topic 114, entity 134) for identifying each of multiple materials (fig. 4, regulatory text document 400) and 2) property values of each material (fig. 4, entities 406) from one piece of document information (fig. 1, domain-specific document 150); a deriver (fig. 1, section identifier 140, action processor 170) that derives a confidence level (fig. 11, confidence 1106) for the property values of each material on the basis of a similarity (14:31-42, similarity) of the property value between the material (14:31-42, received domain-specific document 150) and other materials (14:31-42, prior domain-specific document); and an image processor (fig. 1, GUIs 180) that generates a first image (figs. 9-12, GUI 900/1000/1100/1200) in which the property value of each of the materials are illustrated in a display mode (fig. 11, GUI) according to the confidence level (14:9-10, confidence level) derived for the property values of the material (fig. 11, features 1102 according to confidence 1106 derived from content), and illustrated in association with the identification information of the material (fig. 11, associated features 1101, target 1104 and confidence 1106; 14:11-30, such as top keywords 908, topic scores 912), and outputs the first image (2:1-14, GUI displays output) to a display (figs. 9-12, GUI 900/1000/1100/1200). Huang discloses a confidence level (fig. 6, confidence value generation 67) indicative of reproducibility (12:50-55, confidence value based on similarity for determining reproducibility). Pondicherry and Huang are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor in determining document similarity. At the time of the filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of Pondicherry and Huang before him or her to modify the confidence level purposes of Pondicherry to include the reproducibility confidence of Huang, thereafter a similarity level among documents is understood for subsequent document processing operations. The suggestion and/or motivation for doing so would be obtaining the advantage of enable tracking documents that may be reproduced (22:60-62) as suggested by Huang. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Pondicherry with Huang to obtain the invention as specified in the instant application claims. As to claim 2, Pondicherry discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the extractor extracts multiple classes of property values (fig. 12, classes & attributes on LHS 1204; 10:59-63, classes of domain-specific entities) as the property values. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claim features of image processor GUI outputs as required in dependent claims 3, 5 and 17. The detailed claim features of extractor and deriver as required in dependent claim 6. Conclusion Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 in THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filled 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 of the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 date of this final action. 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

Oct 20, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 05, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 08, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 01, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 10, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

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
Patent 12561753
NODE PREFETCHING IN A WIDE BVH TRAVERSAL WITH A STACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.8%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 835 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