Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/670,639

DISPARATE SENSOR TYPE EVENT CORRELATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
May 21, 2024
Examiner
DEODHAR, OMKAR A
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
BLAST MOTION INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
1025 granted / 1284 resolved
+9.8% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1324
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
§112
8.5%
-31.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1284 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Procedural Summary This is responsive to the claims filed 5/21/2024. Claims 1-30 are pending. Signed copies of the IDS’ are attached. The Drawings filed 5/21/2024 are noted. Claim Interpretation It is noted that where claims recite “and/or” limitations, such limitations, e.g., “A and/or B”, are construed as requiring element A alone, element B alone, or elements A and B taken together.1 While not indefinite, in the Gross decision, the PTAB suggested that the preferred verbiage of such limitations is “at least on of A and B”. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No.: 11,990,160. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims substantially disclose the pending claim limitations. For example, see the claim chart below: Pending Claim 1: Patented Claim 1: A disparate sensor type event correlation system comprising: at least one motion capture element comprising a sensor configured to capture one or more values associated with an orientation, position, velocity, acceleration, angular velocity, and angular acceleration of said at least one motion capture element; a computer processor coupled with said sensor, wherein said computer processor is configured to obtain data that comprises sensor values that include said one or more values from said sensor; obtain one or more other values associated with at least one of an environmental sensor, a physiological sensor; wherein said computer processor is configured to analyze said data and recognize an event within said data to determine event data; correlate at least one of said data, said event data with said one or more other values associated with said at least one of said environmental sensor, said physiological sensor or confirm said event for a particular location and time by analyzing one or more of text, audio, image, and video from a server to determine  a type of event or true event or a false positive event or a confirmed event, or  a type of equipment that said at least one motion capture element is coupled to,  or  a type of activity indicated by said data or said event data. A disparate sensor event correlation system comprising: at least one motion capture element comprising a sensor configured to capture one or more values associated with an orientation, position, velocity, acceleration, angular velocity, and angular acceleration of said at least one motion capture element; a computer processor coupled with said sensor directly or indirectly, wherein said computer processor is configured to collect data that comprises sensor values that include said one or more values from said sensor; obtain one or more other values associated with at least one of an environmental sensor comprising one or more of an altitude sensor, a temperature sensor, a sound sensor, a humidity sensor, a physiological sensor comprising one or more of a heart rate sensor, a pulse sensor, a breathing sensor; wherein said computer processor is configured to analyze said data and recognize an event within said data to determine event data; correlate at least one of said data, said event data with said one or more other values associated with said at least one of said environmental sensor, said physiological sensor to determine a type of event or true event or a false positive event. Conclusion Additional Relevant References: See 892 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMKAR A DEODHAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1647. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, generally 9am-5:30 pm. 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, David Lewis can be reached on 571-272-7673. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /OMKAR A DEODHAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 1 Ex Parte Gross, App. 11/565/441, (PTAB 2014)
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 21, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594500
CONTENT MODIFICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594497
VISUAL PERCEPTION ASSISTANCE APPARATUS AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589315
VIRTUAL AND AUGMENTED REALITY SHOOTING SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589306
IMAGE FRAME PROCESSING METHOD AND AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE SUPPORTING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573262
AMUSEMENT GAMING ACCESS AND AUTHORIZATION POINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1284 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