Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/681,342

MEASURING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 05, 2024
Examiner
GEBRESLASSIE, WINTA
Art Unit
2677
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Dai Nippon Printing Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
101 granted / 133 resolved
+13.9% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+24.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
186
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
66.4%
+26.4% vs TC avg
§102
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
§112
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 133 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-2, 5-7, 11-13, 15-17, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brehm et al. (US 20210031553 A1) in view of Fiala (US 20200090338 A1). Regarding claim 1, Brehm et al. teaches a measuring system comprising: a marker; the marker including: a base material layer (see Fig. 1 element 10 disclose a base material layer, para [0232]; “FIGS. 4b to 4d show the structure of the security element 1 as well as the interplay of a first security feature 2a and a second security feature 2b in schematic top views” Note; Fig. 4 disclose marker); a first layer that is laminated on an observation side of the base material layer (see Fig. 1 element 20 para [0027]; “The one or more first layers are preferably arranged above the one or more second layers when the security element is observed from the front side or the rear side”) and observed in a first color (see para [0172]; “wherein this first layer 21 is formed as first color layer 213”); and a second layer that is partially laminated on an observation side of the first layer (see para Fig. 1 elements 21, 213, para [0028]; “Further, the one or more second layers in particular completely, partially or do not overlap the one or more first layers when the security element is observed from the rear side or the front side”) and observed in a second color different from the first color (see para [0066]; “Further, it is possible for the first color layer and/or the second color layer to be formed and/or to consist of several different colors, … In particular, the color saturation varies in the first and/or second color layer”), the second layer partially concealing the first layer (see para [0028]; “the one or more second layers in particular completely, partially or do not overlap the one or more first layers when the security element is observed from the rear side or the front side”), wherein the first layer is observable in a region where the second layer is not laminated (see Fig. 1 and Fig. 7), and the second layer includes a resist material (see para [0272]; “the second metal layer 2127 with a dyed etch resist, in particular to structure it in areas”). However, Brehm et al. does not teach an imager that photographs the marker, and a calculator that calculates at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, using an image of the marker photographed by the imager. In the same field of endeavor Fiala teaches an imager that photographs the marker (see Abstract; “Fiducial markers are printed patterns detected by algorithms in imagery from image sensors”, see para [0016]; “the present invention there is provided a method for detecting a marker in an image”, see also para [0205]; “a central server provides the information to mobile devices for each marker over a wireless network. The information can be photographs taken previously by a user”); and a calculator that calculates at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, using an image of the marker photographed by the imager (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected…..FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala in order to achieve enhanced performance (see para [0016]). Regarding claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Brehm et al. in the combination further teach wherein the first layer includes a resist material (see para [0272]; “the first metal layer 2117 and/or the second metal layer 2127 with a dyed etch resist, in particular to structure it in areas”). Regarding claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Brehm et al. in the combination further teach wherein either the first layer or the second layer is observable as a mark having an independent shape, (see para [0020]; “the first security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one registered individual image or design element and the second security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one unregistered, continuous endless pattern or design element or vice versa, …”), and the mark includes three or more marks which are arranged to be spaced from one another (Fig. 4b-4g , para [0021]; “for the first security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one registered individual image or design element and the second security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one registered, continuous endless pattern or design element, wherein these are preferably coordinated with each other and overlap in particular in a predetermined manner….The endless patterns or design elements and/or the individual images or design elements are preferably registered relative to each other and/or relative to a substrate onto which the first security feature and/or the second security feature are preferably transferred”). Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated herein. Brehm et al. in the combination further teach wherein a figure for identification is arranged, and the calculator identifies the marker with reference to the figure (see para [0238]; “FIG. 4e shows the combined optical effects of a first security feature 2a and of a second security feature 2b when observed perpendicularly and illuminated with a point light source, wherein the computer-generated hologram in this example represents the letter “K” and preferably overlaps with a virtually three-dimensionally projecting, achromatic, metallized star close to the center of the first security feature 2a here”). Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated herein. Fiala in the combination further teach wherein the calculator performs: a first calculation process of calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, based on images of the marks included in the image of the marker; and a second calculation process of calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in the vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, based on an image of the figure for identification included in the image of the marker (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected…..FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”, see also para [0189]; “FIG. 23 shows multiple camera equations, shown for one camera (cam0 from FIG. 22). The camera's orientation Rcam0 and position [Txcam0,Tycam0,Tzcam0] in the HMD coordinate system [Xhmd,Yhmd,Zhmd[is fixed and known. The fiducial marker centers [u00,v00] or corners [u000,v000,u001,v001,u002,v002,u003,v003] are measured in camera0 with the world coordinates of the fiducial known (center [Xwf0,Ywf0,Zwf0]) also known. The task then reduces to finding the projection matrix [P00, . . . P34] which provide the graphics mappings for AR/VR. These equations would be repeated for each fiducial detected in each camera” Note: implies performing multiple calculations using different marker features). Regarding claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Fiala in the combination further teach the method comprising: a step of the imager photographing the marker (see Abstract; “Fiducial markers are printed patterns detected by algorithms in imagery from image sensors”, see para [0016]; “the present invention there is provided a method for detecting a marker in an image”, see also para [0205]; “a central server provides the information to mobile devices for each marker over a wireless network. The information can be photographs taken previously by a user”); and a step of the calculator calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, using an image of the marker photographed by the imager (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected…..FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”). Regarding claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Fiala in the combination further teach computer-readable storage medium storing a program of the measuring system, the program causing a computer to execute a process (see claim 13; “a processor comprising computer readable medium having stored thereon statements and instructions for execution by a computer, said statements and instructions performing”), comprising: a step of the imager photographing the marker (see Abstract; “Fiducial markers are printed patterns detected by algorithms in imagery from image sensors”, see para [0016]; “the present invention there is provided a method for detecting a marker in an image”, see also para [0205]; “a central server provides the information to mobile devices for each marker over a wireless network. The information can be photographs taken previously by a user”); and a step of the calculator calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, using an image of the marker photographed by the imager (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected …... FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”). Regarding claim 13, the scope of claim 13 is fully encompassed by the scope of claim 1, accordingly, the rejection analysis of claim 1 is equally applicable here. Regarding claim 15, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Brehm et al. in the combination further teach wherein either the first layer or the second layer is observable as a mark having an independent shape, (see para [0020]; “the first security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one registered individual image or design element and the second security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one unregistered, continuous endless pattern or design element or vice versa, …”), and the mark includes three or more marks which are arranged to be spaced from one another (Fig. 4b-4g , para [0021]; “for the first security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one registered individual image or design element and the second security feature to be formed or shaped as at least one registered, continuous endless pattern or design element, wherein these are preferably coordinated with each other and overlap in particular in a predetermined manner… The endless patterns or design elements and/or the individual images or design elements are preferably registered relative to each other and/or relative to a substrate onto which the first security feature and/or the second security feature are preferably transferred”). Regarding claim 16, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated herein. Brehm et al. in the combination further teach wherein a figure for identification is arranged, and the calculator identifies the marker with reference to the figure (see para [0238]; “FIG. 4e shows the combined optical effects of a first security feature 2a and of a second security feature 2b when observed perpendicularly and illuminated with a point light source, wherein the computer-generated hologram in this example represents the letter “K” and preferably overlaps with a virtually three-dimensionally projecting, achromatic, metallized star close to the center of the first security feature 2a here”). Regarding claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated herein. Fiala in the combination further teach wherein the calculator performs: a first calculation process of calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, based on images of the marks included in the image of the marker; and a second calculation process of calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in the vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, based on an image of the figure for identification included in the image of the marker (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected…..FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”, see also para [0189]; “FIG. 23 shows multiple camera equations, shown for one camera (cam0 from FIG. 22). The camera's orientation Rcam0 and position [Txcam0,Tycam0,Tzcam0] in the HMD coordinate system [Xhmd,Yhmd,Zhmd[is fixed and known. The fiducial marker centers [u00,v00] or corners [u000,v000,u001,v001,u002,v002,u003,v003] are measured in camera0 with the world coordinates of the fiducial known (center [Xwf0,Ywf0,Zwf0]) also known. The task then reduces to finding the projection matrix [P00, . . . P34] which provide the graphics mappings for AR/VR. These equations would be repeated for each fiducial detected in each camera” Note: implies performing multiple calculations using different marker features). Regarding claim 21, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Fiala in the combination further teach the method comprising: a step of the imager photographing the marker (see Abstract; “Fiducial markers are printed patterns detected by algorithms in imagery from image sensors”, see para [0016]; “the present invention there is provided a method for detecting a marker in an image”, see also para [0205]; “a central server provides the information to mobile devices for each marker over a wireless network. The information can be photographs taken previously by a user”); and a step of the calculator calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, using an image of the marker photographed by the imager (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected…..FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”). Regarding claim 22, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Fiala in the combination further teach computer-readable storage medium storing a program of the measuring system, the program causing a computer to execute a process (see claim 13; “a processor comprising computer readable medium having stored thereon statements and instructions for execution by a computer, said statements and instructions performing”), comprising: a step of the imager photographing the marker (see Abstract; “Fiducial markers are printed patterns detected by algorithms in imagery from image sensors”, see para [0016]; “the present invention there is provided a method for detecting a marker in an image”, see also para [0205]; “a central server provides the information to mobile devices for each marker over a wireless network. The information can be photographs taken previously by a user”); and a step of the calculator calculating at least one selected from a relative positional relationship between the imager and the marker, a dimension of an object or a distance between designated positions in a vicinity of the marker, a distance between a plurality of markers arranged, and a posture of the marker, using an image of the marker photographed by the imager (see para [0162]; “Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera. The fiducial markers detected by the said algorithms provide a reliable binary result of whether a marker was visible or not. By placing markers at different distances to one or more image sensors, the optical characteristic of visibility distance can be determined by reporting which markers are consistently detected or not detected …... FIG. 50 shows a diagram of an automatic visibility distance smart camera system using fiducial markers. Fiducial markers are mounted at fixed distances relative to a fixed video or still camera”). Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brehm et al. (US 20210031553 A1in view of Fiala as applied in claim 1 above and further in view of Luo (US 20210156680 A1). Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. The combination of Brehm et al. and Fiala as a whole does not teach wherein the base material layer includes glass. In the same field of endeavor Luo teach wherein the base material layer includes glass (see para [0041]; “Currently, in the art, commonly used materials that provide support for the target unit include glass, organic glass, a plastic plate”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala and a light target unit of a machine vision system, and a target assembly in order to resolve technical problems of a cumbersome target unit (see para [0041]). Regarding claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Luo in the combination further teach wherein the base material layer includes glass (see para [0041]; “Currently, in the art, commonly used materials that provide support for the target unit include glass, organic glass, a plastic plate”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala and a light target unit of a machine vision system, and a target assembly in order to resolve technical problems of a cumbersome target unit (see para [0041]). Claims 8-10, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brehm et al. (US 20210031553 A1in view of Fiala as applied in claims 1 and 7 above and further in view of Ballan et al. (US 20230359286 A1). Regarding claim 8, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated herein. The combination of Brehm et al. and Fiala as a whole does not teach wherein the calculator outputs: a calculation result by the first calculation process if calculation is performable properly by the first calculation process; and a calculation result by the second calculation process if calculation is not performable properly by the first calculation process. In the same field of endeavor Ballan et al. teach wherein the calculator outputs: a calculation result by the first calculation process if calculation is performable properly by the first calculation process (see para [0094]; “The failure detector 412 monitors the output of the mapping algorithm 206 to detect when a failure occurs”); and a calculation result by the second calculation process if calculation is not performable properly by the first calculation process (see para [0095]-[0097]; “Upon detection of a failure, the failure detector 412 issues a reset command to the mapping algorithm 206….. During the re-initialization period, the fused pose provider 214 engages the IMU-based 6DoF 208 to transmit the 6DoF fallback pose stream component 212…. The IMU-based 6DoF 208 continues to provide the 6DoF fallback pose stream component 212 throughout the time interval T3, until the mapping algorithm 206 is available again”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala and a light target unit of a machine vision system, and A tracking system and associated algorithms of Ballan et al. in order to create a continuous reset-free augmented reality experience (see para [0094]). Regarding claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated herein. Ballan et al. in the combination further teach wherein the calculator performs the first calculation process and the second calculation process in parallel (see para [0098]; “Features of the tracking system 200 can include the IMU-based 6DoF 208 as a parallel fallback-component to be used when the original tracking algorithm, e.g., the mapping algorithm 206 fails or is close to a failure”). Regarding claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Ballan et al. in the combination further teach further comprising: a controller that performs control based on a calculation result of the calculator (see para [0027]; “a control system 112 that includes an image processor 114, a camera 116, a frame 123, lenses 127, arms 130, and one or more IMUs 150”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala and a light target unit of a machine vision system, and A tracking system and associated algorithms of Ballan et al. in order to produce a composite device pose (see para [0027]). Regarding claim 18, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated herein. Ballan et al. in the combination further teach wherein the calculator outputs: a calculation result by the first calculation process if calculation is performable properly by the first calculation process (see para [0094]; “The failure detector 412 monitors the output of the mapping algorithm 206 to detect when a failure occurs”); and a calculation result by the second calculation process if calculation is not performable properly by the first calculation process (see para [0095]-[0097]; “Upon detection of a failure, the failure detector 412 issues a reset command to the mapping algorithm 206….. During the re-initialization period, the fused pose provider 214 engages the IMU-based 6DoF 208 to transmit the 6DoF fallback pose stream component 212…. The IMU-based 6DoF 208 continues to provide the 6DoF fallback pose stream component 212 throughout the time interval T3, until the mapping algorithm 206 is available again”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala and a light target unit of a machine vision system, and a tracking system and associated algorithms of Ballan et al. in order to create a continuous reset-free augmented reality experience (see para [0094]). Regarding claim 19, the rejection of claim 18 is incorporated herein. Ballan et al. in the combination further teach wherein the calculator performs the first calculation process and the second calculation process in parallel (see para [0098]; “Features of the tracking system 200 can include the IMU-based 6DoF 208 as a parallel fallback-component to be used when the original tracking algorithm, e.g., the mapping algorithm 206 fails or is close to a failure”). Regarding claim 20, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Ballan et al. in the combination further teach further comprising: a controller that performs control based on a calculation result of the calculator (see para [0027]; “a control system 112 that includes an image processor 114, a camera 116, a frame 123, lenses 127, arms 130, and one or more IMUs 150”). Accordingly, it is obvious for the person of the skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify a method producing a security element to specify an improved security element of Brehm et al. in view of the use of imaging and processing fiducial markers of Fiala and a light target unit of a machine vision system, and a tracking system and associated algorithms of Ballan et al. in order to produce a composite device pose (see para [0027]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WINTA GEBRESLASSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-3475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday9:00-5:00. 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, Andrew Bee can be reached at 571-270-5180. 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. /WINTA GEBRESLASSIE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 05, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 17, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 02, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 02, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12579683
IMAGE VIEW ADJUSTMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573238
BIOMETRIC FACIAL RECOGNITION AND LIVENESS DETECTOR USING AI COMPUTER VISION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12530768
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMAGE STORAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12524932
MACHINE LEARNING IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12511861
DETECTION OF ANNOTATED REGIONS OF INTEREST IN IMAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.7%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 133 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