Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/591,818

PARALLEL PROCESSING OF EXTRACTED ELEMENTS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 29, 2024
Examiner
CHAWAN, SHEELA C
Art Unit
2669
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Myscript
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
717 granted / 811 resolved
+26.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
820
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§103
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
§102
32.2%
-7.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 811 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/29/24, 4/15/25 the information disclosure statement was considered by initialing the PTO Form 1449. Drawings The Examiner has approved drawings filed on 6/13/24. 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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Angelov et al., (US. 10,191,653) . As to claim 1, Angelov disclose a method for recognizing handwriting ( column 18, lines 62- 67) input from handwriting strokes ( fig 2 and 6) of digital ink ( abstract, column 10, lines 43 - 51), on a computing device, the computing device comprising a processor ( column 12, lines 29- 30 ) with at least two processing units configured to process data in parallel (column 32, lines 15- 38, 40- 67), a memory ( column 18, line 59 ) and at least one non-transitory computer ( column 3, lines 24- 39) readable medium for recognizing input under control of the processor ( column 12, lines 29-30 ) , the method, comprising: receiving the handwriting ( column 18, lines 62-67) strokes of digital ink (column 10, lines 25- 26); performing element extraction from said strokes ( see fig 4A,4B) to extract a plurality of elements ( column 13, lines 17- 32, 60 -68, column 14, lines 1-17); recognizing the plurality of elements ( column 13, lines 10-32, column 16, lines 32 -46, 47-67, column 33, lines 29- 47) in parallel ( note, parallel processing are done see fig 9, generating stroke data first and second thread processing, see fig 75, 84, 85 ,90 B shows parallel processing ) by ( column 10, lines 43- 54 column, 32, lines 15- 19, 20 -38 ): sending ( column 24, lines 20-25) at least two elements (note, first element processing ink data processing section (100) collecting pen event data, column 11, lines 56-67, column 12, lines 1-5, 24- 30, column 37, lines 35-29 ) second processing element slicing or segmentation of stroke column 11, lines 19- 24, column 18, lines 47- 68) of the extracted plurality of elements to at least two processing units ( note, parallel processing are done see fig 9, generating stroke data first and second thread processing, see fig 75, 84, 85 ,90 B shows parallel processing , column 3, lines 13-23, 24-39, column 41, lines 7- 32) , respectively; sending ( column 24, lines 20-25) successively the remaining elements of the extracted plurality of elements ( fig 17 A,B,C ) to the processing units ( column 12, lines 24-30 as the processing units become available ( note available corresponds to update or sharing with other computer or executes the processing function column 41, lines 28-32 ); compiling ( fig 19) the plurality of recognized elements to generate ( note, generating stroke data , fig 14) the recognized handwriting input ( fig 23 ) , generating stroke data fig 14, see fig 9, generating stroke data first and second thread processing, see fig 75, 84, 85 ,90 B shows the output ). As to claim 2, Angelov discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the elements are text or non-text elements (fig 43) . 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. Claims 3- 5, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Angelov et al., (US. 10,191,653) , as applied to claim 1- 2, above in view of Melinand et al., ( US. 20170109032 A1). Regarding claim 3, Angelov directed to methods and systems for generating, rendering, manipulating and communicating ink data that reproduces a path of hand-drawn (freehand) stroke data and renders the path with style. Angelov is silent about wherein the text elements are words, lines, paragraphs , or mathematical expressions. Melinand disclose system and method of guiding handwriting diagram input. The system comprises: wherein the text elements are words, lines, paragraphs ( see para 26), or mathematical expressions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to have modified Angelov by the teaching of Melinand in order to provide users with recognition feedback which informs them that the handwritten text has been detected, and the content of the text has been recognized (as suggested by Melinand see para 80 ). As to claim 4, Melinand disclose the method of claim 3, wherein the non-text elements are shapes ( see para 76), drawings ( see para 87) or image data including characters, strings or symbols ( see para 93) used in non-text contexts ( see para 66). As to claim 5, Melinand disclose the method of claim 1, wherein sending elements to the processing units comprises sending semantic ( see para 75, 76 ) groups of elements to the processing units. Claims 17-20 are allowed because there is no prior art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6- 16, 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEELA C CHAWAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7446. The examiner can normally be reached M- F 8 am -5.00 pm Flex. 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, Park Chan can be reached at 571-272-7409. 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. /SHEELA C CHAWAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2669
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 29, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602762
Heat- Based Authentication
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596358
SELF-CORRECTING EDGE QUALITY IN A GLASS TEMPERING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12579631
METHOD TO CALIBRATE, PREDICT, AND CONTROL STOCHASTIC DEFECTS IN EUV LITHOGRAPHY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561783
ABNORMALITY DETECTION DEVICE, ABNORMALITY DETECTION METHOD, AND ABNORMALITY DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12561789
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATICALLY GRADING PRE-OWNED ELECTRONIC DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+10.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 811 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