Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/704,651

METHOD, SYSTEM AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR FORMING A DIGITAL SURFACE MODEL BASED ON TREETOPS

Final Rejection §101
Filed
Apr 25, 2024
Priority
Nov 09, 2021 — SE 2100172-2 +1 more
Examiner
MCDOWELL, JR, MAURICE L
Art Unit
2612
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Saab AB
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allowance Rate
804 granted / 929 resolved
+24.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
940
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
§103
71.1%
+31.1% vs TC avg
§102
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 929 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 Claims 1-5 and 7-14 are pending and the applicant has placed claim 11 in condition for allowance by amending it to include allowable subject matter from claim 6. Regarding the 101 rejection, the applicant argues: “Applicant respectfully submits that the amendments made herein to Claim 1 convert each of Claims 1-9 into one of the four categories of patent eligible subjet matter. Software instructions per se are no longer claimed; a executable processor is explicitly recited, along with the details of embodiment thereof, drawn in part from dependent Claim 10, which was notably not rejected on this basis. Applicant thus respectfully requests withdrawal of this rejection in due course.” The examiner respectfully disagrees because claim 1 has been amended to: 1. (Currently Amended) A computer implemented method for forming a digital surface model of treetops, the method (100) comprising one or more processors executing a computer program comprising program instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (412) to perform compriscs the steps of: obtaining (110) at least two images captured from a flying platform; obtaining a set of relative differences in image capture position and/or pose corresponding to said at least two images; detecting (130) treetops in each image; determining (140) a three-dimensional treetop position for each matching treetop detected in plurality of said at least two images, said determining of the three-dimensional treetop position being based on said set of relative differences in image capture position and/or pose; and forming (150) the digital surface model based on said determined three-dimensional at least one determined treetop positions. As is shown supra, the one or more processors that execute a program to perform the steps, are recited in the preamble only, not in the body of the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 1 is directed to: “A computer implemented method for forming a digital surface model of treetops, the method (100) comprising one or more processors executing a computer program comprising program instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (412) to perform the steps of:” obtaining, obtaining, detecting, determining and forming which are nothing more than software instructions. Software instructions are non-statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101. Claims 2-5 and 7-9 depend from claim 1 and contain further steps, for example claim 2 includes the steps of obtaining, detecting and determining, therefore claims 2-5 and 7-9 are rejected under the same rationale. Claim 10 depends from claim 1 but has not been rejected under 101, because it contains a computer program product comprising a non-transitory crm. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-5 and 7-9 would be allowed, except for the 101 rejection. Claim 10 is objected to for depending on rejected claim 1. Claims 11-14 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regardng claim 11, the prior art doesn’t teach: obtain a set of relative differences in image capture position and/or pose corresponding to said at least two images; determine a treetop position for each matching treetop detected in a plurality of said at least two images, said determining of the three-dimensional treetop position being based on said set of relative differences in image capture position and/or pose; and form the digital surface model based on said determined three-dimensional s. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MAURICE L MCDOWELL, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-3707. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 2pm-10pm. 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, Said A. Broome can be reached at 571-272-2931. 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. /MAURICE L. MCDOWELL, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 25, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101
May 18, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 22, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12682546
RENDERING SYSTEM AND AUTOMATED DRIVING VERIFICATION SYSTEM
3y 10m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12682563
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12675953
METHOD AND APPARATUS OF HAIR PROCESSING FOR VIRTUAL OBJECT, DEVICE, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND PROGRAM PRODUCT
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12626822
DEEP LEARNING FOR AUTOMATED SMILE DESIGN
2y 3m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12626422
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CLINICAL WORKSPACE SIMULATION
2y 1m to grant Granted May 12, 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
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+13.0%)
2y 11m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 929 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