Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/610,511

DISPLAY CONTROL DEVICE

Final Rejection §103§DP
Filed
Mar 20, 2024
Examiner
ANWARI, MACEEH
Art Unit
3663
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
659 granted / 813 resolved
+29.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
851
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§103
40.2%
+0.2% vs TC avg
§102
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 813 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . DETAILED ACTION This action is in response to communications filed on 9/17/2025. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 1-5 have been canceled and claims 6- 19 have been newly added. No other claims have been amended, added, or canceled. Accordingly, claims 1 & 6-19 are pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 & 6-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Election by Original Presentation Newly submitted claims 1 & 6-19 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Inventions A—drawn to claims 1-5 as originally presented (Broad Combination)--and B—drawn to claims 1, 12 & 6-11 & 13-19 (Specific Subcombination)—are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the subcombination has separate utility with novel features, such as, a first future consumption rate, a first map, a basic travel electric efficiency by a first coefficient etc. The combination (Claim 1 as originally presented) does not require the specific limitations (a first future consumption rate, a first map, a basic travel electric efficiency by a first coefficient etc.) of the subcombination of newly amended and presented claims 1 and 12 (respectively). There are serious search and examination burdens, as the prior art for the general device (orginal claim 1) different significantly from the art for the specific functional component B (amended claim 1 and newly presented claim 12). Therefore, restriction is required. The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, amended claim 1 and newly presented claims 6-19 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03. To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention. Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention. The amendment filed on 9/17/2025 canceling all claims drawn to the elected invention and presenting only claims drawn to a non-elected invention is non-responsive (MPEP § 821.03) and has not been entered. The remaining claims are not readable on the elected invention because there are no claims to examine. Since the above-mentioned amendment appears to be a bona fide attempt to reply, applicant is given a shortened statutory period of TWO (2) MONTHS from the mailing date of this notice within which to supply the omission or correction in order to avoid abandonment. EXTENSIONS OF THIS TIME PERIOD UNDER 37 CFR 1.136(a) ARE AVAILABLE but in no case can any extension carry the date for reply to this letter beyond the maximum period of SIX MONTHS set by statute (35 U.S.C. 133). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MACEEH ANWARI whose telephone number is 571-272-7591. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00 PM ES. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Ortiz can be reached on 571-272-1206. 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. /MACEEH ANWARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 20, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP
Sep 17, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595638
MACHINE THAT MOVES LEVER, AND COMPUTER CONNECTED TO MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583325
ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565265
VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE, VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12533924
VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12163799
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE INTERACTIVE TELEMETRY, MAPPING, AND TRIP PLANNING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 10, 2024
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
81%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+5.1%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 813 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