Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/864,848

REDUCING EYE STRAIN AND IMPROVING PERFORMANCE IN HEADSET DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 11, 2024
Examiner
BOLOTIN, DMITRIY
Art Unit
2623
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
901 granted / 1116 resolved
+18.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1137
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
43.1%
+3.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1116 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION It would be of great assistance to the Office if all incoming papers pertaining to a filed application carried the following items: 1. Application number (checked for accuracy, including series code and serial no.). 2. Group art unit number (copied from most recent Office communication). 3. Filing date. 4. Name of the examiner who prepared the most recent Office action. 5. Title of invention. 6. Confirmation number (See MPEP § 503). 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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 7 – 9 and 23 – 25 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/15/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6, 10, 17 – 19, 22, 26 and 39 – 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holz et al. (US 2018/0246568). As to claim 1, Holz discloses a method performed by a headset device (wearable device 110 can be an AR/VR headset [0022], [0050]), comprising: obtaining (using sensor 116 [0020]) an indication of an initial eye blink (detecting blinking [0020]); and modifying display characteristics of the headset device to induce a subsequent eye blink if a time elapsed since a last eye blink is greater than a time duration threshold (stimulate blinking if blinking is below a certain rate [0032 – 0033], wherein blink is stimulated by flashing on a screen of the headset [0050]). As to claim 2 (dependent ton 1), Holz discloses the method, wherein the modifying the display characteristics includes adding a blur effect, a border flashing effect, or a screen flashing effect to one or more regions of a display of the headset device (by flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050] corresponding to screen flashing effect to one or more regions of a display of the headset device). As to claim 3 (dependent ton 1), Holz discloses the method, wherein the modifying the display characteristics includes: performing a first modification to the display characteristics of a display of the headset device to induce the subsequent eye blink (initiating first blink stimulation at 340 of fig. 3 [0052]); and performing a second modification to the display characteristics of the display to induce the subsequent eye blink if the subsequent eye blink is not detected within a time window after the first modification to the display characteristics (initiating second blink stimulation at 370 of fig.3 [0053], wherein in a scenario in which one blink stimulation action is determined not to be effective in causing a user to blink, a subsequent blink stimulation action can be initiated (immediately and/or after a time delay, e.g., 10 seconds) [0053]). As to claim 6 (dependent ton 3), Holz discloses the method, further comprising: obtaining an indication of whether the subsequent eye blink is detected within the time window after the first modification; and performing the second modification to the display characteristics of the display if the indication is that the subsequent eye blink is not detected within the time window (in a scenario in which one blink stimulation action is determined not to be effective in causing a user to blink, a subsequent blink stimulation action can be initiated (immediately and/or after a time delay, e.g., 10 seconds) [0053]). As to claim 10 (dependent ton 1), Holz discloses the method, wherein the headset device is an augmented reality (AR) headset, a virtual reality (VR) headset, a mixed reality (MR) headset or an extended reality (XR) headset (wearable device 110 can be an AR/VR headset [0022], [0050]). As to claim 17, Holz discloses a headset device (wearable device 110 can be an AR/VR headset [0022], [0050]), comprising: one or more sensors (using sensor 116 [0020]) configured to obtain an indication of an initial eye blink (detecting blinking [0020]); and one or more processors (stimulation engine 114 of fig. 1) configured to modify display characteristics of the headset device to induce a subsequent eye blink if a time elapsed since a last eye blink is greater than a time duration threshold (stimulate blinking if blinking is below a certain rate [0032 – 0033], wherein blink is stimulated by flashing on a screen of the headset [0050]). As to claim 18 (dependent ton 17), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein the one or more processors configured to modify the display characteristics includes the one or more processors configured to add a blur effect, a border flashing effect, or a screen flashing effect to one or more regions of a display of the headset device (by flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050] corresponding to screen flashing effect to one or more regions of a display of the headset device). As to claim 19 (dependent ton 17), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein the one or more processors configured to modify the display characteristics includes the one or more processors configured to: perform a first modification to the display characteristics of a display of the headset device to induce the subsequent eye blink (initiating first blink stimulation at 340 of fig. 3 [0052]); and perform a second modification to the display characteristics of the display to induce the subsequent eye blink if the subsequent eye blink is not detected within a time window after the first modification to the display characteristics (initiating second blink stimulation at 370 of fig.3 [0053], wherein in a scenario in which one blink stimulation action is determined not to be effective in causing a user to blink, a subsequent blink stimulation action can be initiated (immediately and/or after a time delay, e.g., 10 seconds) [0053]). As to claim 22 (dependent ton 19), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein: the one or more sensors are configured to obtain an indication of whether the subsequent eye blink is detected within the time window after the first modification; and the one or more processors are configured to perform the second modification to the display characteristics of the display if the indication is that the subsequent eye blink is not detected within the time window (in a scenario in which one blink stimulation action is determined not to be effective in causing a user to blink, a subsequent blink stimulation action can be initiated (immediately and/or after a time delay, e.g., 10 seconds) [0053]). As to claim 26 (dependent ton 17), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein the headset device is an augmented reality (AR) headset, a virtual reality (VR) headset, a mixed reality (MR) headset or an extended reality (XR) headset (wearable device 110 can be an AR/VR headset [0022], [0050]). As to claim 39 (dependent ton 1), Holz discloses the method, further comprising: modifying the display characteristics of the headset device (flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050]) to induce one or more eye blinks in accordance with an eye blink configuration (eye blink configuration based on various scenarios such as reading or driving [0048]). As to claim 40 (dependent ton 17), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein the one or more processors are configured to modify the display characteristics of the headset device (flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050]) to induce one or more eye blinks in accordance with an eye blink configuration (eye blink configuration based on various scenarios such as reading or driving [0048]). As to claim 41 (dependent ton 1), Holz discloses the method, further comprising: receiving a user selection (user selection to adjust blink rate [0035]) to enable a modification of the display characteristics to induce eye blinks (flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050]), wherein modifying the display characteristics is in accordance with the user selected blink rate threshold (adjusting based on user selection [0035]). As to claim 42 (dependent ton 17), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein the one or more processors are configured to receive a user selection (user selection to adjust blink rate [0035]) to enable a modification of the display characteristics to induce eye blinks (flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050]), wherein modifying the display characteristics is in accordance with the user selection (adjusting based on user selected blink rate threshold [0035]). As to claim 43 (dependent ton 1), Holz discloses the method, wherein the time duration threshold is: a function of a user preference, a display content attribute, an operating attribute of the headset device, or any combination thereof; in accordance with one or more machine learning models that consider the display content attribute, a content scene characteristic, an application input associated with allowed or not allowed eye blink feedback, or any combination thereof; or specific to a user of the headset device in accordance with a mapping between a plurality of time duration thresholds and a plurality of users (time duration threshold is based on user selection to adjust blink rate threshold [0035]). As to claim 44 (dependent ton 17), Holz discloses the headset device, wherein the time duration threshold is: a function of a user preference, a display content attribute, an operating attribute of the headset device, or any combination thereof; in accordance with one or more machine learning models that consider the display content attribute, a content scene characteristic, an application input associated with allowed or not allowed eye blink feedback, or any combination thereof; or specific to a user of the headset device in accordance with a mapping between a plurality of time duration thresholds and a plurality of users (time duration threshold is based on user selection to adjust blink rate threshold [0035]). 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) 33 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holz. As to claim 33 (dependent ton 3) and claim 35 (dependent ton 19), Holz discloses the method and the device, wherein the time window is immediately and/or after a time delay, e.g., 10 seconds [0053], but fails to disclose that the time window is between approximately one second and approximately two seconds. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Holz such that the time window was modified to be between approximately one second and approximately two seconds as simple design choice alternative achieved though routine experimentation, and wherein such modification would have only required a routine skill. Claim(s) 5, 21, 37 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holz in view of Pacheco et al. (US 2016/0334868). As to claim 5 (dependent ton 3) and claim 21 (dependent ton 19), Holz discloses the method and the device, wherein the second modification to the display characteristics is a flashing effect (flashing the text ‘BLINK’ on a screen of the wearable device [0050]), but does not explicitly disclose that the first modification to the display characteristics is a blur effect. In the same filed of endeavor, Pacheco discloses a method and a device, wherein a first modification to the display characteristics is a blur effect (display blurring to initiate blink stimuli [0046]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Holz in view of Pacheco such that the first modification to the display characteristics was a blur effect as disclosed by Pacheco, with motivation to reduce user discomfort (Pacheco [0004]). As to claim 37 (dependent ton 3) and claim 38 (dependent ton 19), Holz discloses the method and the device, but fails to disclose that the first modification to the display characteristics is a first blur effect and the second modification to the display characteristics is a second blur effect. In the same filed of endeavor, Pacheco discloses a method and a device, wherein the modification to the display characteristics is a blur effect (display blurring to initiate blink stimuli [0046]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Holz in view of Pacheco such that the first modification to the display characteristics was a first blur effect and the second modification to the display characteristics was a second blur effect, with motivation to motivation to reduce user discomfort (Pacheco [0004]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 20, 34 and 36 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 4, the Prior Art of record alone or in combination fails to disclose the method of claim 3, wherein the first modification to the display characteristics is performed in a non-foveal region of the display and the second modification to the display characteristics is performed in a foveal region of the display. (Emphasis Added.) As to claim 20, the Prior Art of record alone or in combination fails to disclose the headset device of claim 19, wherein the first modification to the display characteristics is performed in a non-foveal region of the display and the second modification to the display characteristics is performed in a foveal region of the display. (Emphasis Added.) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DMITRIY BOLOTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-5873. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-7772. 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. /DMITRIY BOLOTIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 11, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603040
Pixel Circuit and Display Device Including the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591404
HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERFACE-DRIVEN DEMAND-AWARE SCREEN SHARING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592167
CURVATURE VARIABLE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592190
PIXEL CIRCUIT, DISPLAY PANEL COMPRISING THE PIXEL CIRCUIT, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585357
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME
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
81%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1116 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