Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/628,685

VIDEO SWITCHING GAMEPAD AND CIRCUIT THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 06, 2024
Priority
Dec 28, 2023 — CN 202311829852.7
Examiner
PIERCE, DAMON JOSEPH
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Shenzhen Yuyuanxin Electronic Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
648 granted / 862 resolved
+5.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
896
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
§112
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 862 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I to claims 1-6 in the reply filed on 3/11/2026 is acknowledged. 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. Claim 1, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. 11045723 to Lee et al (Lee) in view of US Pub. 20160361641 to Koizumi et al (Koizumi) and US Pat. 10272325 to Nevarez. Claim 1. Lee discloses a video switching gamepad, comprising a housing (1), wherein a sliding chute (2) that penetrates through an upper end and a lower end is arranged on a front surface of the housing (1) (Fig. 18A, element 1880, the casing is composed of a front surface part that connects to the upper and lower ends of the casing); a tail end of the sliding chute (2) is provided with a stop body (6) (Fig. 18A, element 1880, an end piece with a slot to stop a gaming device upon insertion into the casing); the stop body (6) directly faces a slide-in end of the sliding chute (2) (Fig. 18A, element 1880, the end piece slot is oriented to face the front surface part); the housing (1) is further provided with two groups of control parts (4), and the two groups of control parts (4) are arranged separately on a tabletop connected to two sides of the sliding chute (2) (Fig. 18A, elements 1802, 1804); and clamping structures are oppositely arranged on the two sides of the sliding chute (2) (Fig. 18B, element 1882, col. 26 line 60 to col. 27 line 40 “coupling member”). PNG media_image1.png 980 1190 media_image1.png Greyscale However, Lee fails to explicitly disclose: the stop body (6) is provided with a charging interface (5) which is configured to be connected to a console; the video switching gamepad further comprises a supporting mechanism (8) arranged on a back surface of the housing (1); and the video switching gamepad further comprises a video switching module which is arranged in the housing (1) and is able to project, when a user plays a game, a picture displayed on a screen of the console to another screen for displaying, output USB data and freely switch the picture back to the screen of the console. Koizumi teaches the stop body (6) is provided with a charging interface (5) which is configured to be connected to a console (Figs. 9-10, ¶¶208, 288 “cradle 5 has a function of charging the information processing device 1 placed therein and a function as a hub device (specifically, a USB hub)”); and the video switching gamepad further comprises a video switching module which is arranged in the housing (1) and is able to project, when a user plays a game, a picture displayed on a screen of the console to another screen for displaying, output USB data (Fig. 3, element 27, ¶¶137, 212 “USB connector”) and freely switch the picture back to the screen of the console (Figs. 18, 19a-e, 24, ¶¶131, 340, 432). The device of Lee would have motivation to use the teachings of Koizumi in order to add flexibility to device users such as providing multiple ways to both recharge the batteries of video gaming components and view video game images. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reconfigure the device of Lee with the teachings of Koizumi in order to provide additional charging capabilities and gameplay viewing options of using the portable device display and/or an external display such as a television in doing so would provide for a diverse gaming system to provide a better gaming experience for users. Nevarez teaches a supporting mechanism (8) arranged on a back surface of the housing (1) (Figs. 3-4, elements 46). The device of Lee would have motivation to use the teachings of Nevarez in order to provide additional support for holding a portable gaming device in place upon insertion in the casing. It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reconfigure the device of Lee with the teachings of Nevarez in order to limit movement of the portable game device and ensure the portable game device does not fall out of the casing during gameplay in doing so would assist in providing an enjoyable gaming experience for users. Claim 4. Lee in view of Nevarez teaches wherein a reinforcing rib (7) is arranged at a position of the sliding chute (2) connected to the stop body (6) (see Nevarez Figs. 3-4, elements 46, compose of parts that help reinforce the portable gaming device). Claim 5. Lee discloses wherein the clamping structures comprise side holes arranged on opposite sides of the sliding chute (2) and two clamping blocks (14) respectively fixed at the two side holes (Figs. 18B, 19A, element 1882, col. 27 line 19 to col. 30 line 25). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3 and 6 are 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAMON J PIERCE whose telephone number is (571)270-1997. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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. /DAMON J PIERCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 06, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611604
COMPETITION EVALUATION SYSTEM AND EVALUATION METHOD
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12605637
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETECTING SOCIALIZATION PREFERENCES AND CONTROLLING MULTIPLAYER SELECTION
2y 9m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12594490
CONTROL DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD
3y 2m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582916
PROGRAM, INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, METHOD, AND SYSTEM
2y 8m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582912
STORAGE MEDIUM, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND GAME PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+28.9%)
2y 10m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 862 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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