Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/579,533

FRAME RATE CHANGING METHOD, SYSTEM AND DEVICE FOR AUGMENTED REALITY DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 16, 2024
Examiner
CHU, DAVID H
Art Unit
2616
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Goertek Inc.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
532 granted / 682 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
714
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
§103
57.8%
+17.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 682 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed 10/28/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 2 and 8-10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hicks et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2018/0075820). 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 2 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hicks et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2018/0075820). Regarding claim 1, Hicks teaches a frame rate changing method for an augmented reality device, comprising: Obtaining scenario information of the augmented reality device, the scenario information comprising at least one of an external environment image, a virtual image, and an attitude parameter of the augmented reality device (determining a rate of motion of the wearable computing device (Hicks: 0087)); Obtaining, when the scenario information changes, a target frame rate of the augmented reality device according to change information of the scenario information (increasing the frame rate when the rate of motion is above a threshold, wherein the increased frame rate corresponds to a “target frame rate” (Hicks: 0099, 0056). Note, increasing the frame rate is done by generating additional in between frames (Hicks: 0037)); And updating a frame rate of the augmented reality device according to the target frame rate, to display target content at the target frame rate (the resulting frame rate). Regarding claim 2, Hicks teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the change information of the scenario information comprising at least one of: A first change information between the current frame external environment image and a previous frame external environment image is not within a first preset range; A second change information between the current frame virtual image and a previous frame virtual image is not within a second preset range; And a third change information between the attitude parameter of the augmented reality device at a current time and the attitude parameter of the augmented reality device at a previous time is not within a third preset range (the range corresponding to above or below the threshold corresponds to the “preset range” (Hicks: 0087)). Claim(s) 8 is a corresponding system claim(s) of claim(s) 1. The limitations of claim(s) 8 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 1. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 8. Note, Hicks teaches a AR/VR system carrying out the steps above (Hicks: 0063). Claim(s) 9 is a corresponding augmented reality device claim(s) of claim(s) 1. The limitations of claim(s) 9 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 1. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 9. Note, Hicks teaches an AR/VR device carrying out the steps above (Hicks: 0063), wherein the AR device comprises a memory (Hicks: 0067, 0075), a processor (Hicks: 0067) and a frame rate changing program (software instructions (Hicks: 0027)). Claim(s) 10 is a corresponding system claim(s) of claim(s) 1. The limitations of claim(s) 10 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 1. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 10. Note, Hicks teaches a storage medium (computer readable medium (Hicks: 0067, 0075)) and a frame rate changing program executed by a processor (Hicks: 0067). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-7 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 David H Chu whose telephone number is (571)272-8079. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 - 1:30pm, 3:30-8:30pm. 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, Daniel F Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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. /DAVID H CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 16, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602881
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING AUGMENTED REALITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591402
AUGMENTED REALITY COLLABORATION SYSTEM WITH ANNOTATION CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591695
METHOD OF IMAGE PROCESSING FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL RECONSTRUCTION IN AN EXTENDED REALITY ENVIRONMENT AND A HEAD MOUNTED DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12524907
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-EXECUTABLE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12494011
RAY TRACING HARDWARE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+2.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 682 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