Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/537,374

THREE-DIMENSIONAL DISPLAY SYSTEM FOR VIDEO GAMES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 12, 2023
Examiner
IANNUZZI, PETER J
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
343 granted / 509 resolved
-2.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
548
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§103
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§102
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 509 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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)(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. Claim(s) 1-8 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. 2018/0050273 by Garoufalis. Regarding claim 1, Garoufalis discloses a three-dimensional display system for playing a game (abstract), the system comprising: a holographic display configured for displaying holographic images which are viewable from a peripheral space surrounding the holographic display (fig. 1; para. 30 – see display 30 and the configuration of players and elements); a processor being operatively coupled to the holographic display (fig. 1; para. 35 – see the processors); a pair of remote electronic devices communicatively coupled to the processor, each remote electronic device of the pair of electronic devices having a memory, the memory storing player game data (fig. 1; para. 35-42 – see the player terminals and the operations of those player terminals); wherein the processor is operable to cause the holographic display to display virtual game characters corresponding to the player game data of each remote electronic device, the processor being operable to cause the holographic display to display the virtual game characters interacting with each other in response to input data (para. 73 – see virtual player hands that are displayed based on the player movements). Regarding claim 2, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the holographic display is configured for displaying holographic images which at least appear to occupy a space adjacent to one player of a pair of players when viewed by another player of the pair of players positioned across the holographic display from the one player (fig. 1; para. 73 – see the position of the player terminals and the displayed image). Regarding claim 3, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the holographic display comprises an image projector and a display screen, the display screen defining an interior volume therein, the image projector being oriented to project images onto an exterior surface of the display screen viewable from the peripheral space, the display screen being transparent such that images projected onto the exterior surface of the display screen from the image projector appear as objects in the interior volume of the display screen (para. 66-68 – see the projection and display on the pyramidal display). Regarding claim 4, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the display screen has a pyramidal shape (fig. 1; para. 66-68 – see pyramidal display). Regarding claim 5, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising a pair of player stations positioned opposite each other across the holographic display, each player station of the pair of player stations comprising a barrier defining a player area opposite the holographic display across the barrier (fig. 1 – see the player stations and the position of those stations relative to the screen and other players). Regarding claim 6, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 5, wherein each player station of the pair of player stations further comprises a user interface communicatively coupled to the processor, the user interface being operable to send instructions to the processor (para. 33 – see the player interface at the player stations). Regarding claim 7, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 6, wherein each player station of the pair of player stations further comprises a transceiver communicatively coupled to the user interface and an associated remote electronic device of the pair of remote electronic devices, the transceiver communicatively coupling the associated remote electronic device to the processor (para. 38 – see communication with a portable electronic device of the player). Regarding claim 8, Garoufalis discloses the system of claim 5, further comprising a base, the holographic display being mounted on the base, the pair of player stations being mounted to the base (fig. 1- see all elements mounted to the same floor). Regarding claims 12-15, Garoufalis discloses these method claims as noted above regarding claims 1-8. 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. Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garoufalis and further in view of U.S. Pub. 2024/0033624 by Phillips. Regarding claim 9, Garoufalis does not explicitly disclose a power supply electrically coupled to the processor, the power supply comprising a battery. These features are disclosed by Phillips at para. 213. Because the references are from a similar art and concerned with a similar problem, see electronic gaming devices, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to construct Garoufalis with Phillips’s power supply with battery backup. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would have been motivated to do so because such items are commonly used to provide for power to operate electronic gaming machines. The use of a battery allows for a game state to be saved or uninterrupted play, this robustness more than offsets the cost of equipment in a gaming environment. Regarding claim 10, Phillips discloses the system of claim 9, further comprising a power cord being electrically coupled to the battery, the power cord being configured to electrically couple to an external power source to charge the battery (para. 213 – see the use of a battery backup and power supply). Regarding claim 11, Garoufalis and Phillips render obvious this claim as noted above regarding claims 1-10. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER J IANNUZZI whose telephone number is (571)272-5793. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:30PM EST. 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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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. /PETER J IANNUZZI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592126
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF ELECTRONIC GAMING INCLUDING GESTURE-BASED PLAYER CONSTRUCTED SYMBOL COMBINATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589304
METHOD AND AR GLASSES FOR AR GLASSES INTERACTIVE DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589311
PERFORMANCE PREDICTION FOR VIRTUALIZED GAMING APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589290
FUNCTION BUTTON MODULE WITH VARIABLE FUNCTION LAYOUT AND GAME CONTROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586442
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING SINGLE ACCOUNT AND SINGLE WALLET FOR DISTRIBUTED GAMING SYSTEM ACROSS JURISDICTIONS
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
67%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+14.6%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 509 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