Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/881,240

AN IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING IMAGES OBTAINED FROM PERSONAL CARE DEVICES

Non-Final OA §101§103
Filed
Jan 03, 2025
Priority
Jul 04, 2022 — EU 22182759.5 +1 more
Examiner
YENTRAPATI, AVINASH
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Koninklijke Philips N.V.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
522 granted / 697 resolved
+14.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -4% lift
Without
With
+-4.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
709
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§103
54.8%
+14.8% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
11.3%
-28.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 697 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 § 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. Claim 15 is 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 it is directed to a computer program. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. 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. Claims 1-3, 9, 10-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D11 or in view of D22 and further in view of D33 or D44. With regard to claim 1, D1 teach image processing system for processing images received from an imaging device (104) mounted at a head of a personal care device (100), comprising: a processor (110), which is configured to: receive (302) a sequence of images from the imaging device at the head of the personal care device, the personal care device comprising cleaning elements visible in at least one of the images in the sequence of images (see D1 fig. 4, ¶ 41: toothbrush including a camera and light source to capture images, ¶¶ 53-54: computer processor; see also D2 fig. 3, ¶¶ 231, 233, 298: tooth brush head with camera and light projector to capture images, see ¶¶ 70-73: computer processor). Neither D1 nor D2 teach process (312) the sequence of images to generate a background image with moving parts in the sequence of images removed such that the cleaning elements of the personal care device are removed from the background image. However, D3 teach the missing features (see abstract, fig. 1, § 3.2: background image generated by removing moving foreground objects). See also D4 abstract, ¶¶ 5, 98, 115, 135, 137: separating background from foreground. One skilled in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. In particular, it would have been obvious to incorporate known teachings of generating a background image by removing foreground objects such as moving objects as taught by D3 and D4 into the configuration of D1 or D2, yielding predictable and enhanced results. The motivation would have been to remove moving or blurred portions of the image in order to analyze the static portion such as the teeth for monitoring teeth cleaning and oral health. With regard to claim 2, D3 teach system of claim 1, wherein the processor is adapted to process the sequence of images to generate the background image by using a median filter on the sequence of images (see abstract, fig. 1, § 3.2: median filter). See also D4: abstract, ¶¶ 5, 98, 115, 135, 137: median filter. The motivation for combining the references is the same as stated above. With regard to claim 3, D3 teach system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to iteratively update (314) the background image using the latest available image in the sequence of images (see abstract, fig. 1, § 3.3: background image is updated based on new input images). See also D4 abstract, ¶ 115: updating background. With regard to claim 9, see discussion of claim 1. D1 and D2 teach a brush head comprising bristles, an imaging device and a lighting system (see D1 fig. 4, ¶ 41: toothbrush including a camera and light source to capture images, ¶¶ 53-54: computer processor; see also D2 fig. 3, ¶¶ 231, 233, 298: tooth brush head with camera and light projector to capture images, see ¶¶ 70-73: computer processor). With regard to claims 10-12 and 15, see discussion of corresponding claims above. Claims 4-8, 13-14 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. Pertinent Art Gerhardt et al. (US 2022/0192807) teach a toothbrush head with a camera. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AVINASH YENTRAPATI whose telephone number is (571)270-7982. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached on (571) 272-3638. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /AVINASH YENTRAPATI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2672 1 US Publication No. 2017/0135464. 2 US Publication No. 2023/0099863. 3 Zhang, Ruolin, and Jian Ding. "Object tracking and detecting based on adaptive background subtraction." Procedia Engineering 29 (2012): 1351-1355. 4 US Publication No. 2017/0161905.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 03, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12748053
INSPECTION DEVICE AND METHOD OF INSPECTING INSPECTION TARGET USING THE SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12737838
Lightweight Dense Residual Network for Video Super-Resolution on Mobile Devices
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12737913
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12738444
HYBRID BACKGROUND EXTRACTION IN ELECTRON HOLOGRAPHY
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12738157
Method and System for the Camera-Based Determining of the Speed of a Vehicle in Traffic
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 15, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (-4.3%)
2y 11m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 697 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