Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 31, 2026
Application No. 18/632,125

METHOD FOR DISPLAYING CONTENT ACCESSIBLE TO SCREEN READERS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 10, 2024
Priority
Apr 11, 2023 — provisional 63/495,371
Examiner
WU, CHONG
Art Unit
2613
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Be More Colorful LLC
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allowance Rate
430 granted / 498 resolved
+24.3% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
510
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
66.8%
+26.8% vs TC avg
§102
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§112
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 498 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered. The amendment appears to overcome prior art rejection. The 103 rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant presented no argument regarding the 112(b) rejection and did not amend related limitations. Therefore, the 112(b) rejection is being maintained by the Examiner. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “wherein the cube of images comprises six (6) separate image files” twice. 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 1-5, 7, 9, 10 and 13 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Independent claim 1 recites “the most important subject” which lacks antecedent basis. The claim fails to define a subject before referring to the subject. Furthermore, it’s unclear how “the most important subject” is defined/determined. The term “important” is a relative/subjective term which renders the claim indefinite. The importance of a candidate subject may be evaluated based on its computational load, visual appearance, price, volume, or many other properties, and can even vary based on a particular user’s preference. The term “most important” 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. Claims 2-5 are dependent from claim 1, and are therefore rejected. Independent claim 7 recites similar features of claim 1, and is therefore rejected. Claim 9 is dependent from claim 7, and is therefore rejected. Claim 10 and claim 13 are dependent from a canceled claim, and are therefore rejected. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONG WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5207. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI: 9AM-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, Xiao Wu can be reached at 571-272-7761. 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. /CHONG WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 10, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Dec 31, 2025
Response Filed
May 01, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 27, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 27, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12688658
VIRTUAL REALITY-BASED CONTROL METHOD, APPARATUS, TERMINAL, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12688664
Virtual Paper
1y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12657848
INGESTION PIPELINE FOR GENERATING AUGMENTED REALITY CONTENT GENERATORS
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12657827
TESSELLATION HARDWARE SUBDIVISION OF PATCHES INTO SUB-PATCHES
1y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12646275
THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECT MANIPULATION CONTROL
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 02, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+3.3%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 498 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