Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/698,741

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR POINT CLOUD COMPRESSION USING HYBRID DEEP ENTROPY CODING

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Priority
Oct 05, 2021 — provisional 63/252,482 +1 more
Examiner
KWAN, MATTHEW K
Art Unit
2482
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
InterDigital Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
263 granted / 372 resolved
+12.7% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+34.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
388
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
89.6%
+49.6% vs TC avg
§102
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
§112
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 372 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submissions filed on 6/10/26 and 6/16/26 have been entered. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/10/26 and 6/16/26 were filed after the mailing date of the Notice of Allowance on 3/10/26. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 3, “at least one another one” seems to be missing an “of”. As best understood by the Examiner, similar language to line 3 of claim 16 (“at least one of another one”) should be used in order to improve clarity. 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 and 10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The terms “large”, “smooth” and “intricate” in claims 1 and 10 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “large”, “smooth” and “intricate” are 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 Specification does not provide a standard for measuring the degree of a “large smooth surfaces of the spatial neighborhood” or “intricate details of the spatial neighborhood”. Dependent claims 5-9 and 14-18 are also rejected as a result of including the limitations of claims 1 and 10. Remarks After further search and consideration of the claims after RCE, the Examiner has determined that there is a claim objection and a 112 issue with certain language in the independent claims (see above). The Examiner requests that the Applicant provide an explanation, evidence and/or cite support in the Specification for the standard for measuring the degree of the terms “large”, “smooth” and “intricate” when discussing “large smooth surfaces of the spatial neighborhood” or “intricate details of the spatial neighborhood” to ensure that one of ordinary skill in the art could ascertain the scope of the claim. See MPEP § 2173.05(b)(I). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW KWAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7073. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571)272-7331. 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. /MATTHEW K KWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Jun 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Sep 03, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 24, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jan 26, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684154
Simulcast Layers For Multiview In Video Coding
1y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12671825
METHOD FOR VIDEO CODING USING VARIOUS BLOCK PARTITIONING STRUCTURES
2y 2m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12671831
IMAGE DECODING DEVICE USING DIFFERENTIAL CODING
1y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12666070
IMAGE DECODING DEVICE USING DIFFERENTIAL CODING
1y 6m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12659479
Luma and Chroma Block Partitioning
4y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.0%)
2y 11m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 372 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