Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/888,269

NAVIGATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, COMPUTER DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 18, 2024
Examiner
PARK, KYLE S
Art Unit
3666
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Tencent Technology (Shenzhen) Company Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
92 granted / 140 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
170
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§103
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§102
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§112
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 140 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Status of the Claims This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on September 18, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN202210547448.X, filed on May 19, 2022. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 18, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 2, 4, 6, 11, 15, 16, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2, lines 1-2, “a vehicle head direction” should read “the vehicle head direction”. Claim 2, line 2, “a curving degree” should read “the curving degree”. Claim 4, line 2, “a vehicle head direction” should read “the vehicle head direction”. Claim 4, line 3, “a curving degree” should read “the curving degree”. Claim 6, line 2, “the head up” should read “head up”. Claim 11, line 2, “a current traveling speed” should read “the current traveling speed”. Claim 15, line 1, “a real-time position” should read “the real-time position”. Claim 16, line 1, “route curvature data” should read “the route curvature data”. Claim 16, line 2, “a navigation route” should read “the navigation route”. Claim 18, line 2, “a vehicle head direction” should read “the vehicle head direction”. Claim 18, lines 2-3, “a curving degree” should read “the curving degree”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 6-8 and 12-13 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. As to claim 6, the limitation “the navigation perspective” at line 1 is unclear. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “a navigation perspective”. As to claim 12, the limitation “the target distance” at line 2 is unclear. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “a target distance”. Further, the limitation “the head up direction” at line 4 is unclear. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “a head up direction”. As to claim 13, the limitation “the head up direction” at line 6 is unclear. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the limitation to be “a head up direction”. Claims 7-8 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-5, 9-11 and 14-20 are allowed. Claims 6-8 and 12-13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 USC §112(b), set forth in this Office Action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: MATSUMOTO et al. (JP H1038588 A) regarding a system for displaying the current position of the moving body on a map. TAKAKAZU (JP 3460513 B2) regarding a system for performing heading-up control for changing the orientation of a map displayed on a vehicle-mounted display according to the orientation of the vehicle. Seo (US 20110050689 A1) regarding a system for generating a three-dimensional (3D) path. KO (KR 20150064767 A) regarding a system for performing a path guide on augmented reality. YANG et al. (CN 105865482 A) regarding a system for map navigation. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE S. PARK whose telephone number is (571)272-3151. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00AM-5:00PM. 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, Anne M ANTONUCCI can be reached at (313)446-6519. 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. /K.S.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3666 /ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 11, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600384
MODEL HYPERPARAMETER ADJUSTMENT USING VEHICLE DRIVING CONTEXT CLASSIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596367
METHOD FOR THE SEMI-AUTOMATED GUIDANCE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594886
Vehicle and Control Method Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576874
DRIVER SCORING SYSTEM AND METHOD USING OPTIMUM PATH DEVIATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565194
PARKING ASSISTANCE APPARATUS AND PARKING ASSISTANCE METHOD
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+31.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 140 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