Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/612,044

APPARATUS FOR HOLDING A DISPLAY SCREEN

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 21, 2024
Examiner
RAYAN, MIHIR K
Art Unit
2622
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc.
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
494 granted / 582 resolved
+22.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
606
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.7%
+15.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
§112
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 582 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 21 January 2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment Acknowledgment is made of Applicant arguments/Remarks made in amendment in which the following is noted: claims 1, 4, 6, 10, 14, and 15 are amended; the rejection of the claims traversed; claims 2, 9, 12 and 13 are cancelled; and claim 16 is newly added. Claims 1, 3 0 8, 10 – 11, and 14 – 16 are currently pending and an Office action on the merits follows. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1, 3 – 6, 10 – 11, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shojiro Osada (Publication number: JPH09168170A), hereafter Osada, in view of Yoshimura et al; (Publication number: JPH09205603 A1), hereafter Yoshimura. Note an English-language machine translation of the references is relied upon in the rejection of the claims below. Regarding claim 1: Osada discloses an apparatus for holding a 3D display screen (Osada Figure 1; [0016] stereoscopic image display; [0026]), the apparatus comprising: reception circuitry to receive (Osada Figure 1 17), from at least one location-tracking device, location information indicative of a location of a viewer (Osada Figure 1 13; [0027] camera 13 images observer 7); position-tracking circuitry response to the location information to determine a relative position of the viewer relative to the 3D display screen (Osada [0027] position of eyes relative to display are determined by position tracking circuitry 17); viewing-region-checking circuitry to determine whether the relative position of the viewer is within a predetermined viewing region, wherein the predetermined viewing region comprises a region within which an image displayed on the 3D display screen causes a parallax effect to be visible with respect to an object of the image when viewed by the viewer positioned in the predetermined viewing region (Osada [0033]; Figure 3 see rhombic region); and adjustment control circuitry (Osada Figure 1 driver unit 25 and rotation driving unit 11) response to the viewing-region-checking-circuitry to adjust an orientation of the 3D display screen with respect to yaw and pitch to maintain the parallax effect by maintain a relative yaw and pitch with respect to the viewer (Osada [0032][0045]). In Osada, the adjustment by the circuitry with respect to roll is not disclosed. However, Yoshimura discloses an image display device. More particularly, Yoshimura discloses detecting the tilt (roll) of the user and adjusting the roll of the display to match the inclination of the user (Yoshimura Figure 6A and 6B; [0026]). It would have been obvious to modify Osada to include roll of the user wherein the adjustment control circuitry responsive to the viewing-region-checking circuitry to adjust an orientation of the 3D display screen with respect to pitch, yaw AND roll to maintain the parallax effect by maintaining relative yaw, pitch, AND roll with respect to the user, as claimed. Those skilled in the art would appreciate the ability to set an optimum inclination of the display screen without bother the viewer (Yoshimura [0012]). Regarding claim 3: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the predetermined viewing region comprises a region within which the at least one location-tracking device is capable of tracking the viewer (Osada [0033] Figure 3). Regarding claim 4: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the adjustment control circuitry comprises at least one of: rotation circuitry to adjust the orientation of the 3D display screen by rotating the display screen about one or more axes of rotation; and translation circuitry to adjust a position of the 3D display screen (Osada [0029][0032]). Regarding claim 5: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) discloses the apparatus of calim 1, wherein: the reception circuitry is configured to receive, as the location information, image data captured by at least one camera; and the position-tracking circuitry comprises image recognition circuitry to determined, based on the image data, the relative position of the viewer (Osada [0027 – 0028] [0033]). Regarding claim 6: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) discloses the apparatus of claim 5, further comprising image processing circuitry configured to perform an object recognition process to identify a given object within the image, and then to perform object tracking to determine relative position of the viewer, wherein the object recognition process comprises a facial recognition process and the identified object comprises at least one of an object identified as a face and an object identified as an eye (Osada [0027] position detection camera used to detect position of his/her eyes). Regarding claim 10: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) discloses the apparatus of claim 1, comprising the 3D display screen (Osada Figure 1 image display 3 is stereoscopic image display 1). Regarding claim 11: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) discloses the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the 3D display screen comprises a spatial reality display screen (Osada [0002][0004 – 0005]). Regarding claim 14: Claim 14 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 1. Regarding claim 15: Claim 15 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 1. Claim(s) 7is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shojiro Osada (Publication number: JPH09168170A), hereafter Osada, in view of Yoshimura et al; (Publication number: JPH09205603 A1), hereafter Yoshimura, in view of Hwang et al; (Patent number: US 7, 898, 429 B2), hereafter Hwang. Note an English-language machine translation of the references is relied upon in the rejection of the claims below. Regarding claim 7: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) does not disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the reception circuitry is configured to receive, as the location information, audio data recorded by at least one microphone; and the position-tracking circuity comprises audio processing circuity to determine, based on the audio data, the relative position of the viewer. However, Hwang discloses an angle-adjustable method and automatic angle-adjustable display device. More particularly, Hwang discloses an automatic-adjustable display device which monitors the viewer’s position by detecting wireless signals emitted from the wireless transmitting and receiving sensor and reflected from the user. These transmitting and receiving sensor include ultrasonic transmitting and receiving sensors (Hwang Col 13 lines 14 – 31). It would have been obvious to further modify Osada (in view of Yoshimura) wherein: the reception circuitry is configured to receive, as the location information, audio data recorded by at least one microphone; and the position-tracking circuity comprises audio processing circuity to determine, based on the audio data, the relative position of the viewer, as claimed. Those skilled in the art would appreciate reducing the need for image-based position determination, thereby simplifying operation. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shojiro Osada (Publication number: JPH09168170A), hereafter Osada, in view of Yoshimura et al; (Publication number: JPH09205603 A1), hereafter Yoshimura, in view of Abeloe, Kenneth A. (Publication number: US 2011/0267437 A1), hereafter Abeloe. Note an English-language machine translation of the references is relied upon in the rejection of the claims below. Regarding claim 8: Osada (in view of Yoshimura) does not disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the reception circuitry is configured to receive the location information from at least one handheld and/or wearable device. However, Abeloe discloses the reception circuitry is configured to receive the location information from at leastone handheld and/or wearable device (Abeloe [0056] Glasses tracker performing motion tracking; see Figure 7). It would have been obvious to further modify Osada (in view of Yoshimura) wherein the reception circuitry is configured to receive the location information from at least one handheld and/or wearable device, as claimed. Those skilled in the art would appreciate the ability to synchronize the stereoscopic images. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 16 is 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. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 16, the prior art does not disclose the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a turntable attached with the 3D display screen such that: (i) rotating the turntable about a yaw axis adjusts the yaw of the 3D display screen; (ii) tilting the turntable about a pitch axis adjusts the pitch of the 3D display screen; and (iii) tilting the turntable about a roll axis adjusts the roll of the 3D display screen; wherein the yaw axis, the pitch axis and the roll axis are orthogonal to one another. As an example of the prior art, Yoshizumi, Shingo (Publication number: US 2011/0181690 A1), hereafter Yoshizumi, discloses an imaging control apparatus, imaging apparatus, imaging control method, and program. More particularly, Yoshizumi discloses a pan/tilt head 10 which is configured to pan and tilt a camera 1 mounted thereon (Yoshizumi Figure 4). However, the prior art does not disclose a turntable attached with the 3D display screen such that: (i) rotating the turntable about a yaw axis adjusts the yaw of the 3D display screen; (ii) tilting the turntable about a pitch axis adjusts the pitch of the 3D display screen; and (iii) tilting the turntable about a roll axis adjusts the roll of the 3D display screen; wherein the yaw axis, the pitch axis and the roll axis are orthogonal to one another, as claimed. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yoshizumi, Shingo (Publication number: US 2011/0181690 A1), Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIHIR K RAYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 - 5pm (EST). 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, LunYi Lao can be reached at 571-272-7671. 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. /MIHIR K RAYAN/ 7 February 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 21, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 13, 2025
Response Filed
May 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 05, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 21, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594007
ENERGY TRANSMITTING DEVICE AND SYSTEM TO MONITOR AND TREAT TINNITUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586294
Systems And Methods For Generating Stabilized Images Of A Real Environment In Artificial Reality
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572222
MODULAR VEHICLE HMI
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12554320
BODY TRACKING METHOD, BODY TRACKING SYSTEM, AND HOST
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12547244
Gaze-Driven Autofocus Camera for Mixed-reality Passthrough
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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.7%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 582 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