Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/583,356

ELECTRONIC APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 21, 2024
Examiner
HOWARD, RYAN D
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
794 granted / 997 resolved
+11.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1036
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
45.5%
+5.5% vs TC avg
§102
34.1%
-5.9% vs TC avg
§112
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 997 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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) 1-4, 7-12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu (US 2005/0046804 A1), in view of Kubota (US 2013/0169889 A1). Regarding claim 1, 9 and 15, Akutsu teaches a distance sensor (13a, 13b, 13d, 13c, figure 1A; paragraph 0021-0022); An image projector (10, figure 1A), and At least one processor (39, figure 3) configured to: Control the image projector to project an image (VC, figure 5B, paragraph 0065) onto a projection surface, to provide a projection image on the projection surface (paragraph 0060-0069); Acquire distortion information in a vertical direction (paragraph 0071; see also paragraph 0066-0069) corresponding to the projection image based on distance information to the projection surface acquired by the distance sensor (paragraphs 0069 and 0071), Acquire keystone correction information in the vertical direction based on the distortion information in the vertical direction (paragraph 0071), Based on receiving a first user instruction for a keystone correction (M01, figure 4; AFK is autofocus and auto keystone correction; paragraph 0038), perform a keystone correction (M02, figure 4; paragraph 0060, 0064 and 0071for the image to provide a keystone corrected image based on keystone correction information in a horizontal direction (paragraph 0071 corresponding to the first user instruction and the acquired keystone correction information in the vertical direction (paragraph 0071), and Control the image projector to project the keystone corrected image (paragraph 0072-0073). Akutsu does not specify that the electronic apparatus comprises an acceleration sensor and that the distortion information in the vertical direction depends on a slope information of the electronic apparatus acquired by the acceleration sensor. Kubota teaches that the electronic apparatus comprises an acceleration sensor (paragraph 0046) and that the distortion information in the vertical direction depends on a slope information of the electronic apparatus acquired by the acceleration sensor (paragraph 0032). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the display of Akutsu to use the acceleration sensor of Kubota in order to improve the accuracy of the vertical keystone correction. Regarding claim 2 and 10, Akutsu teaches performing both vertical and horizontal keystone correction (paragraph 0071) and wherein the image projector projects the second keystone corrected image (II image range after correction. Figure 6) Akutsu in view of Kubota does not specify that the vertical keystone correction is done prior to the horizontal keystone correction. Akutsu in view of Kubota therefore discloses the claimed invention except for specifying that the vertical keystone correction is done prior to the horizontal keystone correction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the vertical keystone correction step prior to the horizontal keystone correction step, since it has been held that rearranging parts (in this case the steps) of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the display of Akutsu in view of Kubota to do the vertical correction before the horizontal correction in order to improve the accuracy of the keystone correction. Regarding claim 3 and 11, Akutsu teaches the keystone correction information in the horizontal direction corresponding to the first user instruction comprises rotation information in one of a left direction or a right direction (paragraph 0064), and The at least one processor is configured to acquire the second keystone corrected image by performing a rotational correction for the first keystone corrected image (upon modification of claim 2 and 10 above to reverse the horizontal and vertical keystone correction operation, the horizontal information would be applied to the first keystone corrected image) in any one of the left direction or the right direction with the vertical direction as an axis by a predetermined angle based on the keystone correction information in the horizontal direction (paragraph 0071). Regarding claim 4 and 12, Akutsu teaches based on receiving a second user instruction for the keystone correction while the keystone corrected image is being projected, perform a subsequent keystone correction for the keystone corrected image based on the keystone correction information in the horizontal direction corresponding to the second user instruction to provide a subsequent keystone correction (M05, the ‘No’ process, if the button is not hit again, which failing to press the button is the human instruction, the keystone processor will be subsequently performed), and control the image projector to project the subsequent keystone corrected image (S11, figure 5). Regarding claim 7, Akutsu teaches a communication interface (19, figure 1B; paragraph 0055) wherein the at least one processor is configured to: based on receiving a signal corresponding to the first user instruction selecting one of a left direction button (15m, figure 2) or a right direction button (15n, figure 2) among buttons in four directions provided on an external apparatus (15, figure 2) through the communication interface, acquire the keystone correction information in the horizontal direction corresponding to the first user instruction (paragraph 0042). Regarding claim 8, Akutsu teaches identifying a correction amount of the keystone correction in the horizontal direction based on a type of a user input corresponding to the first user instruction, and perform the keystone correction in the horizontal direction based on the identified correction amount (paragraph 0042). Claim(s) 5 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu (US 2005/0046804 A1), in view of Kubota (US 2013/0169889 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Hamano et al. (US 2008/0117387 A1). Regarding claim 5 and 13, Akutsu in view of Kubota teaches acquire distortion information in a vertical direction for a basic projection image based on slope information of the electronic apparatus and the distance information to the projection surface, and acquire keystone correction information in the vertical direction based on the distortion information in the vertical direction for the basic projection image (see rejection of claims 1 and 9 above, basic image just being the image information that the projector would otherwise project without AFK process). Akutsu in view of Kubota does not teach predicting a basic projection image of on the projection surface based on information of the electronic apparatus. Hamano teaches predicting a basic projection image (via 16 and 13, figure 1) of on the projection surface based on information of the electronic apparatus (paragraph 0046-0051). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the display of Akutsu in view of Kubota to use the image correction based on electronic apparatus information as taught in Hamano in order to improve image quality (paragraph 0008 and 0010). Claim(s) 6 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu (US 2005/0046804 A1), in view of Kubota (US 2013/0169889 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Fujisaki et al. (US 2011/0069235 A1). Regarding claim 6 and 14, Akutsu teaches a user interface comprising buttons in four direction of up, down left, and right (15k, 15m, 15n and 15l, figure 2; paragraph 0042), wherein the buttons are further designed for manual adjustment of the keystone correction (paragraph 0042). Akutsu in view of Kubota does not teach that the user interface is projected onto the projection surface. Fujisaki teaches a user interface projected onto the projection surface for the keystone correction operation (72, figure 2 and figures 4-5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the display of Akutsu in view of Kubota to use the OSD of Fujisaki in order to improve user convenience. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D HOWARD whose telephone number is (571)270-5358. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00. 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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at 5712722303. 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. /RYAN D HOWARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 1/17/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 07, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587621
LIGHT SOURCE DEVICE AND IMAGE PROJECTION DEVICE HAVING A LIGHT SOURCE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587620
CONTROL METHOD, CONTROL DEVICE, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM STORING CONTROL PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565330
AIRCRAFT BIRD STRIKE REDUCTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12548980
Single Element Dot Pattern Projector
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12547009
EFFICIENT USER-DEFINED SDR-TO-HDR CONVERSION WITH MODEL TEMPLATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 997 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