Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/748,996

Selecting And Correlating Physical Activity Data With Image Data

Non-Final OA §112§DP
Filed
Jun 20, 2024
Examiner
MAZUMDER, SAPTARSHI
Art Unit
2612
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Nike, Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
241 granted / 375 resolved
+2.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
402
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§103
50.6%
+10.6% vs TC avg
§102
6.8%
-33.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 375 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 submission filed on 12/02/2025 has been entered. 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 3-4, 6-8 and 12-16 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. Claims 3-4, 6-8 and 12-16 recite “the overlaid image data”. However independent claims 1 and 11 recite two overlaid image data: first overlaid image data and second overlaid image data. So it is not clear which overlaid image data it is referring to. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 11 recite simultaneous display in the first display and second display. Claim 13 also recites the same thing. Therefore claim 13 is not limiting claim 11. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-2, 5, 9-11 and 17-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claims 1, 11 and 18 are allowed because the best applicable prior art fails to expressly teach “displaying, on a second display device and simultaneous to the displaying of the first overlaid image data on the first display device ,the second overlaid image data”. Dependent claims 2, 5, 9-10, 17 and 19-20 are also allowed by virtue of dependency. Claims 3-4, 6-8 and 12 and 14-16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 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.” Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, with respect to double patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, with respect to 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive as prior art doesn’t teach simultaneous display. The rejection has been withdrawn. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAPTARSHI MAZUMDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3454. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am-4 pm PST. 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 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. /SAPTARSHI MAZUMDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Jun 13, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Sep 02, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 08, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 08, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 02, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597211
GENERATING VARIANTS OF VIRTUAL OBJECTS BASED ON ADJUSTABLE EXTERNAL FACTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586316
METHOD FOR MIRRORING 3D OBJECTS TO LIGHT FIELD DISPLAYS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582488
USER INTERFACE FOR CONNECTING MODEL STRUCTURES AND ASSOCIATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579745
Curvature-Guided Inter-Patch 3D Inpainting for Dynamic Mesh Coding
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567210
Multipath Artifact Avoidance in Mobile Dimensioning
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+11.8%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 375 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