Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/599,414

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REDUCING RENDER LATENCY IN A DISPLAY-SERVER COMPUTING SYSTEM

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Mar 08, 2024
Examiner
PARK, SANGHYUK
Art Unit
2623
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Netzyn Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
509 granted / 717 resolved
+9.0% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
742
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
54.1%
+14.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 717 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
Detailed Action Response to Amendment The amendment filed on 6/30/2025 has been entered and considered by the examiner. 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 Objections Claims 8-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 8 recites the limitation, “delivering by a display device to a server computer over a communications network a first signal according to a delay”. The phrase should be changed to “delivering, by a display device to a server computer over a communications network, a first signal according to a delay”. This discussion applies to all of the other limitations in claim 8. Claims 9-14 are objected as being dependent on objected base claim 8. Appropriate correction is required. 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dimitrov (PGPUB 2019/0164518 A1). As to claim 1, Dimitrov (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2C, 2D) teaches, a system (system 100), comprising: a server computer (server 102)(Fig. 1A) includes a server synchronization frame rate generator (frame timer 120, feedback adaptive frame rate controller 122 and GPU 112)(¶ 46); a user device (client 104) communicatively connected to the server computer (jitter absorption parameter 140, user interactive inputs 142, frame arrival feedback 144, image frame stream 146, network/communication connection 106)(Fig. 1A), the user device includes a user device synchronization frame rate generator (frame arrival monitoring 142, ¶ 47, 50) that is time synced with the server synchronization frame rate generator (¶ 46, 52, 54: i.e. frame timer 120 and feedback adaptive frame rate controller are synchronized to the remote client device display VSYNC signal 152); wherein the user device sends the server computer an event signal (“frame late-speed up” signal, ¶ 59) at a precise time (i.e. in response to the timing of frame C being late to expected time 154) of a signal of the user device, together with a delay (increment or decrement) (duration)(¶ 102: i.e. client device operates jitter absorption parameter, JAP, and includes information regarding whether frame arrived early or late and optionally by what duration); wherein the server computer processes the event signal and the delay, and the server computer returns a processed data to the user device (¶ 102, 110, 112: i.e. statistics are received via feedback, and FPS is newly computed to transmit frame in time), wherein the processed data arrives at the user device at a correct time (expected arrival time 158) in sync with timing of the user device synchronization frame rate generator (¶ 66: i.e. frames E-I are sped up and transmitted at faster rate to present frames at expected arrival time 158, and ¶ 122: i.e. frame time 120 can be changed to generate and transmit frames at expected arrival time). As to claim 2, Dimitrov (Figs. 1A, 1B) teaches, wherein the user device accesses processed data at the correct time (¶ 66: i.e. receive frames at expected arrival time) As to claim 3, Dimitrov (Fig. 1A) teaches, wherein the user device includes a processor (CPU 130, GPU 132), memory (frame buffer 134, memory 136, and jitter buffer 138)(Fig. 1A). As to claim 4, Dimitrov (Fig. 1A) teaches, wherein the server computer includes a processor (CPU 110, GPU 112) and memory (memory 116, frame buffer 114). As to claim 5, Dimitrov (Figs. 1A, 1B) teaches, wherein the server synchronizing frame rate generator is frequency locked to the user device synchronizing frame rate generator (¶ 54: i.e. frame timer 120 is configured to fire at 60 fps to match the client device display 108 refresh rate). As to claim 6, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, wherein the user device sends the event signal (“frame early-slow down”) at a time delay (increment or decrement) (duration) from timing (i.e. time point 158) of the user device synchronizing frame rate generator (¶ 102: i.e. JAP transmits the feedback information, including the duration) As to claim 7, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, wherein the time delay enables the processed data from the server computer to arrive at the user device at the correct time (i.e. allows next expected frame to arrive on time, which is displayed as “I” in display 108) of the user device synchronizing frame rate generator (¶ 112: i.e. frame rate may be changed, which allows frames to arrive before expected arrival time 158 as shown with frames E-I in Fig. 1B). As to claim 8, Dimitrov (Figs. 1A, 1B, 2C, 2D) teaches, a method of operations of a display-server computing system (system 100), comprising: delivering, by a display device (display 108) to a server computer (server 102) over a communications network (user interactive inputs 142, frame arrival feedback 144, image frame stream 146, network/communication connection 106), a first signal (frame arrival feedback 144) according to a delay (increment or decrement) (frame arrival monitoring 142, which indicates duration of delay, ¶ 102) of the display device (Figs. 1A, 1B), the delay corresponds to a timing of the display device (refresh rate of the client display, ¶ 201); processing, by the server computer, the first signal with the input (input device 109) and timing of the delay (¶ 102, 110, 112: i.e. statistics are received via feedback, and FPS is newly computed to transmit frame in time according to speed up/ slow down required), outputting, by the server computer, a result of the processing (¶ 102, 110, 112: i.e. FPS is newly computed to transmit frame in time, and the frames are transmitted), delivering, by the server computer to the display device over the communication network, the result of processing (¶ 50: i.e. frame images 146 are streamed at a frame rate that is adapted in accordance with the feedback 144 received); outputting, by the display device, the result at a correct timing of the display device (¶ 56: i.e. frames are transmitted to arrive at the expected arrival time, ¶ 201: i.e. rendered accordance with the actual refresh rate of the client display). As to claim 9, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, if a receipt time of the result is earlier than an adjusted time (i.e. frames E-I have been received early), delaying the first signal by an increment (¶ 66, 68: i.e. if a frame arrives early, buffered in jitter buffer 138 before being displayed by progressively increasing amount of time). As to claim 10, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, if a receipt time of the result is later than an adjusted time of the user device (expected arrival time 154), speeding the first signal by a decrement (¶ 64: i.e. rate greater than 60 fps, ¶ 72, 73: i.e. frame rate is increased to 60 or 120). As to claim 11, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, if a receipt time of the result is about same as an adjusted time of the user device, maintaining the first signal without increment or decrement (¶ 110: i.e. when client indicates that the frames arrived in time, then the server device does not reconfigure the frame rate). As to claim 12, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, if a receipt time of the first signal is earlier than an adjusted time of the server computer, the server computer increments a timing signal for processing (¶ 112: i.e. frame rate is changed by changing frame timer 120, which may generate a signal interrupt or other signals, ¶ 66, 68: i.e. if a frame arrives early, buffered in jitter buffer 138 before being displayed by progressively increasing amount of time). As to claim 13, Dimitrov (Fig. 1B) teaches, if a receipt time of the first signal is later than an adjusted time of the server computer, the server computer decrements a timing signal for processing (¶ 112: i.e. frame rate is changed by changing frame timer 120, which may generate a signal interrupt or other signals, ¶ 64: i.e. rate greater than 60 fps, ¶ 72, 73: i.e. frame rate is increased to 60 or 120). As to claim 14, Dimitrov (Figs. 1A, 1B) teaches, if a receipt time of the input is about same as an adjusted time of the server computer, the server computer maintains the first signal without increment or decrement for processing (¶ 112: i.e. frame rate is changed by changing frame timer 120, which may generate a signal interrupt or other signals, ¶ 110: i.e. when client indicates that the frames arrived in time, then the server device does not reconfigure the frame rate). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 6/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended claims 1-14 to include new limitations regarding the timing correction made at the user device rather than at a processing server, and argues that Dimitrov does not disclose these features. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Dimitrov prior art teaches the jitter absorption parameter JAP 140, which defines how long frames spend in the jitter butter on average based on the frame arrival monitoring 142 from the client device side. As further discussed, and shown in Figs. 2C and 2D, JAP can generate and transmit feedback, including buffer latency, frame early/late and duration of the delay to the server. The server can use these information to generate corresponding frame rate to speed up or down the frame generation and transmission to deliver the frames at the expected arrival time of the client device as discussed in ¶ 102 and 105. Therefore, Dimitrov prior art still teaches all of the amended claim limitations, and the office action is maintained final. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGHYUK PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7359. The examiner can normally be reached on 10:00AM - 6:00 M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chanh Nguyen can be reached on ((571) 272-7772. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. 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. /SANGHYUK PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 08, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 26, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 30, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602134
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603055
DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING A SWEEP DRIVER THAT PROVIDES A SWEEP SIGNAL, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594141
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND MEDIA FOR PRESENTING BIOPHYSICAL SIMULATIONS IN AN INTERACTIVE MIXED REALITY ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591322
TOUCH INPUT SYSTEM INCLUDING PEN AND CONTROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592207
GATE LINE DRIVING CIRCUIT WITH TOP GATE AND BOTTOM GATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
71%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+16.5%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 717 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