Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/576,198

System and Method for the Automatic Detection of Openly-Carried Firearms

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 03, 2024
Examiner
JIANG, ZAIHAN
Art Unit
2488
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Carnegie Mellon University
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
520 granted / 626 resolved
+25.1% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
658
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.6%
+9.6% vs TC avg
§102
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
§112
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 626 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION The Office Action is in response to Response to Election 07/08/2025. Application 18576198 filed on 01/03/2024. Claims 1-13 have been cancelled. Claims 21-25 are newly-added. and claims 14-25 are pending. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 2. 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 § 103 5. 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 of this title, 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. 6. Claims 14-25, are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salguero et al. (US 20210374405) and in view of Coles et al. (US 20200226892). Regarding claim 14, Salguero teaches a system (fig. 2) for automatically detecting handheld firearms at a venue (as shown in fig. 4; abstract, …The present invention is directed to a system and method including a firearm detection device) comprising: a server (fig. 2, sever 300) executing an object detection model trained to detect handheld firearms in one or more images of a venue (fig. 8, step 801-808) and to provide a binary classification indicating the presence or non-presence of a firearm in the images (fig. 8, step 807; paragraph 0073, …At step 807, … enables classifications to be associated with the objects … recognition of firearms and individuals; paragraph 0004, … determine if one or more objects from the content are a firearm); one or more devices in communication with the server (fig. 2, control system 111); and one or more image sensing devices connected to each of the one or more devices (fig. 4, 110; paragraph 0005, …wherein the one or more processors are configured to receive from a camera on a firearm detection device one or more content, identify firearms); wherein the server receives the one or more images from the one or more devices and inputs the received images to the object detection model (fig. 8, step 801, 802, 803 and 804). It is noticed that Salguero does not disclose explicitly of one or more edge devices. Coles discloses of one or more edge devices (paragraph 0068, … the server computing device or the computing device 128 … analyzes the same portion …identifies features of the object within the visible light images, such as the geometry of the edges of the object). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that one or more edge devices as a modification to the method for the benefit of that provide accuracy weapon detection (paragraph 0074). Regarding claim 15, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that an alert interface (as shown in fig. 1, 113; paragraph 0049, …the purpose of the speaker may be to allow the transmission of an auditory signal to alert the presence of a shooter to a bystander. ). Regarding claim 16, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 15 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that the server determines that the binary classification indicates the presence of a firearm in at least one of the one or more images and signals the alert interface to raise an alert. (as shown in fig. 1, 113; paragraph 0049, …the purpose of the speaker may be to allow the transmission of an auditory signal to alert the presence of a shooter to a bystander. … control system 111 to receive auditory signals … Control system 111 may also have the necessary circuitry to amplify and convert the signal to speaker …). Regarding claim 17, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 16 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that raising an alert includes one or more of automatically contacting local authorities and sounding an alarm at the venue (paragraph 0021, … the firearm detection system may send an alert or notification to the police, paramedics, or a security group associated with the building where the firearm detection device is positioned or otherwise located). Regarding claim 18, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Coles further discloses that the one or more images are received from one or more edge devices via a wired or wireless connection (fig. 2A, 134 and camera 104 are wire or wireless connected; paragraph 0074, … In response to identifying a person, the weapon detection module 134 or the server computing device may identify a weapon attached to the person…). The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 14’s rejection. Regarding claim 19, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Coles further discloses that each of the one or more edge devices performs the functions of: periodically receiving still images or video from the one or more image sensing devices; and sending one or more images derived from the still images or video to the server for input to the object detection model. (fig. 2A, 134 are edge devices and also the object detection model; paragraph 0074, … In response to identifying a person, the weapon detection module 134 or the server computing device may identify a weapon attached to the person… … such as the geometry of the edges of the heat signature; paragraph 0072, … The server computing device or the computing device 128 …analyze visible light images using image classification and/or machine learning techniques to identify a weapon in the building premises or a suspicious bag which may contain a weapon). The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 14’s rejection. Regarding claim 20, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 19 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that determining if the one or more images derived from the still images or video depict a person (as shown in fig. 4); and sending the one or more images server only if a person is depicted in the image (paragraph 0021, … the firearm detection system may then detect which type of firearm an individual is carrying as well as one or more characteristics of the individual such as their hair, height, clothes, and sex. …). Regarding claim 21, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Coles further discloses that the object detection model is a single shot detector. (fig. 6A, 602; 134; paragraph 0007, … The sensor data collected at a pod is then analyzed by a computing device within the pod to detect dangerous events such as gunshots). The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 14’s rejection. Regarding claim 22, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that periodically receiving still images or video from the one or more image sensing devices (fig. 8, step 801); and sending one or more images derived from the still images or video to a server for input to the object detection module (fig. 8, step 802-804). Regarding claim 23, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 22 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that the one or more image sensing devices include one or more video cameras (fig. 5, 119; paragraph 0046, … Sensor system 113 may include camera 119 having any type of capture device for capturing an image or video); and Coles further discloses that the one or more edge devices perform the further function of: periodically extracting one or more frames from video output from the video cameras; and sending the one or more frames to the server as the one or more images (paragraph 0083, … The server computing device or the computing device 128 within the pod 100 may perform a frame-by-frame analysis of the IR images …). The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 14’s rejection. Regarding claim 24, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that the one or more image sensing devices include one or more still image cameras (fig. 5, 119; paragraph 0046, … Sensor system 113 may include camera 119 having any type of capture device for capturing an image or video). Regarding claim 25, the combination of Salguero and Coles teaches the limitations recited in claim 14 as discussed above. In addition, Salguero further discloses that determining if one or more of the images depict a person (as shown in fig. 4); and sending the one or more images to the server only if the one or more images depict a person (paragraph 0021, … the firearm detection system may then detect which type of firearm an individual is carrying as well as one or more characteristics of the individual such as their hair, height, clothes, and sex. Once scanned and identified, the firearm detection system may send an alert or notification …). 7. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form 892. 8. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAIHAN JIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1399. The examiner can normally be reached on flexible. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sath Perungavoor can be reached on (571)272-7455. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-0655. 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. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. /ZAIHAN JIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 03, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 23, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587655
IMPROVING STREAMING VIDEO QUALITY IN LOSSY NETWORK CONDITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581105
SUPPLEMENTAL ENHANCEMENT INFORMATION MESSAGE CONSTRAINTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581117
THREE-DIMENSIONAL DATA ENCODING METHOD, THREE-DIMENSIONAL DATA DECODING METHOD, THREE-DIMENSIONAL DATA ENCODING DEVICE, AND THREE-DIMENSIONAL DATA DECODING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581055
VERIFICATION METHOD FOR A PANORAMIC LENS FOCUSING WORKSTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574547
VIDEO DIVERSIFICATION DEVICE, VIDEO SERVICE SYSTEM HAVING THE SAME, AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
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
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.5%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 626 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