Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/626,411

METHOD AND SYSTEM OF PROCESSING GRAPHICS DATA WITH TILE-BASED RENDERING PIPELINE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Examiner
SOON, DAVID W
Art Unit
2615
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
MediaTek Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allow Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-62.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
8 currently pending
Career history
8
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
§103
52.6%
+12.6% vs TC avg
§102
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§112
31.6%
-8.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph 4 includes the word "primitive" instead of "primitives." Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Independent Claim 1 recites “outputting, by the mesh shader in response to an input of the graphics data, legacy mesh shader output parameters including vertices and primitives, and additional data with a meshlet bounding-box, or axis-aligned bounding box (AABB) structure”. The examiner is unclear as to the intended meaning of this recitation, in particular, the claim is grammatically structured such that the meshlet bounding box or alternatively the AABB is used in the processing of graphics data. However, the claim is unclear as to whether the meshlet bounding box is sending to the tiler its input and generating by the tiler a visibility stream since there is no further recitation in the independent or dependent claims that explain the meshlet bounding box. Independent claims 10 and 19 have similar recitation, thus claims 1, 10, and 19 are unclear and indefinite. Claims 2-9, 11-18, and 20 inherent this indefiniteness from the independent claims they depend on. The term “smallest possible rectangle or polygon” in Claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smallest possible” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “smallest possible storage size” in Claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smallest possible” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, claims 1-20 will be rejected as best understood by the examiner. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Prior art fails to fairly suggest the processing graphics data system of claim 10 wherein “A system for processing graphics data, comprising: a compiler; and a graphics rendering pipeline comprising a mesh shader and a tiler, coupled with the compiler, and configured such that: in response to an input of the graphics data, the mesh shader outputs legacy mesh shader output parameters including vertices and primitives, and additional data with a meshlet bounding-box, or axis-aligned bounding box (AABB) structure; wherein the processing includes: in a first pass, the compiler instructs the AABB being sent to the tiler as an input, and the tiler then generates a visibility stream accordingly, wherein each entity of the visibility stream indicates that the AABB is fully visible, partially visible, or invisible in the view frustum; and in a consecutively second pass, the compiler instructs the visibility stream being sent back to the tiler as a further input along with the legacy mesh shader output parameters for coming rasterization in a fragment pass.” Independent claims 1 and 19 recite similar limitations, and thus claims 1-20 would be allowable if the 112b rejection above is overcome. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Neff et al. (U.S. Pg Pub No. US 20230101978 A1) teaches a meshlet shading atlas using screen-space bounding boxes. Kjoll et al. (U.S. USPAT No. US 11361400 B1) which teaches full tile primitives in tile-based graphics processing. Decell et al. (U.S. Pg Pub No. US 20200342662 A1) teaches dynamically enabling tiling in 3D workloads. Iqbal et al. (U.S. Pg Pub No. US 20200061811 A1) teaches a robotic control system involving computer visibility information. Shefi (WIPO International Application WO 2018146667 A1) teaches a system and method for generating images of virtual objects with bounding boxes of minimal dimensions. John Hable, Visibility Buffer Rendering with Material Graphs, 2021-07-05, Filmic Worlds (Year: 2021), teaches compressing visibility data and decompressing during later use. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID W SOON whose telephone number is (571) 272-8113. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00. 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, Alicia Harrington can be reached at (571) 272-2330. 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. /DAVID W SOON/Examiner, Art Unit 2615 /ALICIA M HARRINGTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 08, 2026
Response Filed

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
Grant Probability
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 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