Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/819,787

EFFECT DISPLAY METHOD, COMPUTER DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 29, 2024
Examiner
LHYMN, SARAH
Art Unit
2613
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
BEIJING ZITIAO NETWORK TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
357 granted / 546 resolved
+3.4% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
576
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§103
63.2%
+23.2% vs TC avg
§102
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§112
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 546 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 1, 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN110536151) (all citations to English language machine-translation included with this office action), in view of Zhang, H., Cao, X., Ho, J. K., & Chow, T. W. (2016). Object-level video advertising: an optimization framework. IEEE Transactions on industrial informatics, 13(2), 520-531. (“Zhang”). Regarding claim 1: Yang teaches: an effect display method (page 2, method for adding virtual gift special effects to a video), comprising: acquiring a video frame image to be processed, wherein the video frame image comprises an image comprising at least one target object acquired during live streaming (Yang, page 2, acquire video from live video stream data, in combination with pages 3-4, there is at least one target object, the target object being a person in the video frame); determining, based on position information corresponding to the target object in the video frame image, a display position corresponding to a target effect matching the target object (pages 3-5, determining synthesis position information for synthesizing and displaying the virtual gift special effect to the video frame. This position information is based on the target object (human, person) in the video frame. See also pages 20-21 and Fig. 7). … and displaying, based on the display position, the target effect matching each target object in the video frame image (see mapping above and/or Yang, Fig. 8, display the video with target effect or virtual gift effect added to video). Regarding the remaining features of claim 1, consider the following. In analogous art, Zhang teaches: wherein the position information corresponding to the target object in the video frame image is determined based on historical position information corresponding to the target object in a plurality of frames of historical frame images (see section II(A) which teaches that when Zhang inserts content into video, “shots” are examined, which are described and teach historical position information in historical frame images. This is done to select an optimal location. See also Sections III-IV and Fig. 1. While the effect that Zhang is adding is an advertisement, modifying the applied references, such that the methodology of Zhang is used to find placement of the effect of Yang in relation to a target object (both references relevant to target object placement locations), is all of taught and suggested by the prior art, and would have been obvious and predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See MPEP §2143(A). The prior art included each element recited in claim 1, although not necessarily in a single embodiment, with the only difference being between the claimed element and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of certain elements in a single prior art embodiment, as described above. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and in that combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. One of ordinary skill in the art would have also recognized that the results of the combination were predictable as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 7: see also claim 1. Yang teaches: a computer device, comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores machine-readable instructions executable by the processor, the processor is configured to execute the machine-readable instructions stored in the memory, and when the machine-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the processor performs (pages 31-33) an effect display method, which comprises: The method corresponds to the method of claim 1; the same rationale for rejection applies. Regarding claim 13: see also claim 1. Yang teaches: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program, wherein when the computer program is executed by a computer device, the computer device performs (pages 31-33) an effect display method, which comprises: The method corresponds to the method of claim 1; the same rationale for rejection applies. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-6, 8-12 and 14-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, relevant to video processing and content modifications. * * * * * Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sarah Lhymn whose telephone number is (571)270-0632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST. 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, Xiao Wu can be reached at 571-272-7761. 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. Sarah Lhymn Primary Examiner Art Unit 2613 /Sarah Lhymn/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 29, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602882
AUGMENTED REALITY DISPLAY DEVICE AND AUGMENTED REALITY DISPLAY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602764
METHODS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-ASSISTED INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT USING MIXED REALITY SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602746
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BACKGROUND MODELLING FOR A VIDEO STREAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585888
AUTOMATICALLY GENERATING DESCRIPTIONS OF AUGMENTED REALITY EFFECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586163
INTERACTIVELY REFINING A DIGITAL IMAGE DEPTH MAP FOR NON DESTRUCTIVE SYNTHETIC LENS BLUR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
65%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+15.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 546 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