Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/568,707

RECOGNIZER TRAINING APPARATUS, RECOGNITION DEVICE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND TRAINING METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Examiner
AKHAVANNIK, HADI
Art Unit
2676
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Kyocera Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
843 granted / 980 resolved
+24.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1021
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.5%
+6.5% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 980 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. First, Applicant argues that Bendale is flat and does not teach hierarchy. The examiner believes the applicant argues the references individually. Bendale is being used to teach open world (incremental category addition), meaning it inputs new labels/categories into a classifier when a new category is found. Yan teaches a coarse to fine hierarchical CNN architecture and multiple branching CNN’s which outputs are valid for a subset of categories. The new additional categories from Bendale are added into the Yan’s multiple coarse to fine architecture. The examiner believes that under BRI, adding a new lower category to a higher category does not require an explicit tree data structure but only requires that a more specific (or fine) category be added. Also, it is not required for the training to be done online or offline. The examiner is just showing the combination of Bendale and Yan teach adding new categories to a coarse to fine architecture. The examiner also does not believe that this is impermissible reconstruction because the heirachial classifies of Yan is still being used. Bendale is only being used to teach that when a new category is discovered it can add a new incremental label to Yan’s coarse to final architecture. The examiner recommends further defining the relationship the relationship between the lower category and higher category. 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) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan (20160117587) in view of Bendale (Towards Open World Recognition). Regarding claim 1, Yan teaches a recognizer training apparatus comprising: an obtainer configured to obtain an image (par. 32); and a controller configured to train a first object recognizer which consists of a plurality of stepwise determiners in a multilayer structure including a top-layer determiner and at least one lower-layer determiner and which recognizes a target in a captured image by classifying the target stepwise from a higher layer to a lower layer, the top-layer determiner classifying the target into one of categories, the at least one lower-layer determiner classifying the target in a category determined by a stepwise determiner in a higher layer into a lower category (pars. 30-32, coarse to fine), wherein the controller is configured to train the first object recognizer by causing the stepwise determiners to classify a target in the image obtained by the obtainer from a higher layer to a lower layer (par. 30-32, stepwise is coarse to fine). Bendale teaches adding a new lower category to a higher category corresponding to a lower-layer determiner that cannot classify the target into an existing lower category (see section 3, definition 1, makes new category based on threshold). It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Yan the ability to add input layers as taught by Bendale. The reason is to allow the system to add a new category into the set of learned categories. Regarding claim 2, see section 3, definition 1 of Bendale. Regarding claim 3, see the threshold in section 3 of Bendale. Regarding claim 4, see threshold and outlier model in section 3 of Bendale. Regarding claim 5, see the rejection of claim 1, Yan teaches top layer determiner and Bendale teaches creating new classes. Regarding claims 6-16, see the rejection of claims 1-5. Additional Prior art The examiner is also citing Roy (“Tree-CNN: A Hierarchical Deep Convolutional Neural Network for Incremental Learning”) which teaches adding new layers to a tree structure neural network. 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 HADI AKHAVANNIK whose telephone number is (571)272-8622. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5 PM Monday to Friday. 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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-4637. 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. /HADI AKHAVANNIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 02, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602787
PROCEDURE FOR CONTROL, PROGNOSIS AND COMPARATIVE SUPPORT RELATED TO DERMATOLOGICAL LESIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602953
GESTURE RECOGNITION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12579662
HIGH-PRECISION LOCALIZATION OF A MOVING OBJECT ON A TRAJECTORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573073
JOINT ROTATION/LOCATION FROM EGOCENTRIC IMAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573207
DRIVER ASSISTANCE APPARATUS AND DRIVER ASSISTANCE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 980 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