Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/513,614

STEREOSCOPIC CAMERA DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Nov 19, 2023
Examiner
LU, TOM Y
Art Unit
2667
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Acer Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
826 granted / 941 resolved
+25.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
964
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§103
28.7%
-11.3% vs TC avg
§102
37.2%
-2.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 941 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/19/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/19/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-3 and 6-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hendrickson et al (“Hendrickson” hereinafter, U.S. Publication No. 2014/0028802 A1). As per claim 1, Hendrickson discloses a stereoscopic camera device (figure 2), comprising: a first camera (paragraph [0029]: camera 202 in figure 2 or camera 102 in figure 1A if conventional), configured to capture toward an object (paragraph [0027]: “object”) to obtain a first image of the object; a second camera (camera 204 in figure 2 or camera 102 in figure 1A if conventional), configured to capture toward the object to obtain a second image of the object; and a controller (paragraph [0074]: “microprocessors”), electrically connected to the first camera and the second camera, wherein the controller synthesizes the first image and the second image to generate a stereoscopic image of the object (paragraph [0023]: 3-D or stereoscopic imaging/movie), wherein: by the controller, the first camera and the second camera are controlled, so that toe-in angles of an optical axis of the first camera and an optical axis of the second camera are greater than 0 (paragraph [0029], and figures 1A and 2, the toe-in angle of two cameras are greater than 0); or the controller image processes the first image and the second image, so that the processed first image and the processed second image are equivalent to images captured when the toe-in angles of the optical axis of the first camera and the optical axis of the second camera are greater than 0 (one of two alternative features were examined above). As per claim 2, Hendrickson discloses wherein when the toe-in angles are greater than 0: a distance between an imaging position of the stereoscopic image of the object and a display surface is greater than 0, wherein an intersection position of the optical axis of the first camera and the optical axis of the second camera falls on the display surface, the display surface is parallel to a base line, and a straight line formed between the first camera and the second camera is the base line (see set up figure 2). As per claim 3, Hendrickson discloses wherein when the toe-in angles are greater than 0: a difference value between an included angle formed by a first straight line and a second straight line and an included angle formed by a third straight line and the second straight line falls between ±0.5 degrees, wherein a straight line formed between an imaging position of the stereoscopic image of the object and a position of a preset left eye or a preset right eye is the first straight line, a straight line formed perpendicular to a connection direction between the position of the preset left eye and the position of the preset right eye and toward a direction of the stereoscopic image is the second straight line, and a straight line formed between a center of sight of the preset left eye and the preset right eye on a display surface and the position of the preset left eye or the preset right eye is the third straight line, an intersection position of the optical axis of the first camera and the optical axis of the second camera falls on the display surface, the display surface is parallel to a base line, and a straight line formed between the first camera and the second camera is the base line (as shown in figures 2-5, and paragraphs [0030]-[0033] & [0047]-[0048], Hendrickson teaches calculating camera positioning parameters in accordance with left and right eye positions, and the so-called “straight lines” are virtual/imaginary lines, can be achieved with adjustment of camera positions and angles). For claims 6-11, as explained above, the toe-in angles of the camera can be adjusted through an actuator for each camera, and the angle, distance and display size will change accordingly when the camera positioning parameter changes as shown in figures 2 and 4. Claims 12-14 are not examined as being dependent upon the alternative that was not selected in claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-5 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOM Y LU whose telephone number is (571)272-7393. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM. 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, Matthew Bella can be reached at (571) 272 - 7778. 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. /TOM Y LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 19, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597133
TRAINING END-TO-END WEAKLY SUPERVISED NETWORKS AT THE SPECIMEN (SUPRA-IMAGE) LEVEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591967
DISPLACEMENT ESTIMATION OF INTERVENTIONAL DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591296
REDUCING POWER CONSUMPTION OF EXTENDED REALITY DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573037
LEARNING APPARATUS, LEARNING METHOD, TRAINED MODEL, AND PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564867
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DETECTING CONTAINERS WHICH HAVE FALLEN OVER AND/OR ARE DAMAGED IN A CONTAINER MASS FLOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
88%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+3.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 941 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