Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/896,316

3D SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Sep 25, 2024
Examiner
EDWARDS, TYLER B
Art Unit
2488
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
VEFXi Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
359 granted / 468 resolved
+18.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
482
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 468 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/25/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,652,973. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other: Application No. 18/896,316 U.S. Patent No. 11,652,973 Claim 1 Claim 1 A method for conversion of a series of two dimensional images into a series of three dimensional images comprising: A method for conversion of a series of two dimensional images into a series of three dimensional images comprising: (a) receiving said series of two dimensional images having pixels where each of said series of two dimensional images are from the same viewpoint; (a) receiving said series of two dimensional images having pixels where each of said series of two dimensional images are from the same viewpoint; (b) processing said series of two dimensional images based upon machine learning to determine a respective depth map associated with each of said series of two dimensional images where each of said series of two dimensional images are from said same viewpoint; (b) processing said series of two dimensional images based upon a neural network to determine a respective depth map associated with each of said series of two dimensional images where each of said series of two dimensional images are from said same viewpoint; (c) processing said depth map determined based upon (1) said machine learning and (2) said two dimensional images to present three dimensional images on a display, wherein portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being behind a plane of a display screen of said display and other portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being in front said plane of said screen of said display, where said three dimensional images has a total depth including the apparent depth behind said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth behind said screen and the apparent depth in front of said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth in front of said screen, where said appearance of being in front of said plane of said display screen is greater than 15% of said total depth. (c) processing said depth map determined based upon (1) said neural network and (2) said two dimensional images to present three dimensional images on a display, wherein portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being behind a plane of a display screen of said display and other portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being in front said plane of said screen of said display, where said three dimensional images has a total depth including the apparent depth behind said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth behind said screen and the apparent depth in front of said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth in front of said screen, where said appearance of being in front of said plane of said display screen is greater than 15% of said total depth. Claim 2 Claim 2 wherein said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is greater than 20% of said total depth. wherein said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is greater than 20% of said total depth. Claim 3 Claim 3 wherein said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is greater than 25% of said total depth. wherein said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is greater than 25% of said total depth. Claim 4 Claim 4 wherein said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is greater than 30% of said total depth. wherein said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is greater than 30% of said total depth. Claim 5 Claim 5 wherein said appearance of being in front of said plane of said screen of said display is adjustable by a viewer. wherein said appearance of being in front of said plane of said screen of said display is adjustable by a viewer. Claim 6 Claim 6 wherein said processing said depth map and said series of two dimensional images adjusts one of said pixels to the left and to the right in different views for each viewer eye-view supported by a target display device so that said pixel appears to be behind said screen, and said processing said depth map adjusts another one of said pixels to the left and to the right in different views for said viewer so that said pixel appears to be in in front of said screen, where said processing for said pixel behind said screen and said processing for said pixel in front of said screen are adjusted in different manners for viewing by the same eye of said viewer. wherein said processing said depth map and said series of two dimensional images adjusts one of said pixels to the left and to the right in different views for each viewer eye-view supported by a target display device so that said pixel appears to be behind said screen, and said processing said depth map adjusts another one of said pixels to the left and to the right in different views for said viewer so that said pixel appears to be in in front of said screen, where said processing for said pixel behind said screen and said processing for said pixel in front of said screen are adjusted in different manners for viewing by the same eye of said viewer. Claim 7 Claim 7 wherein said adjustment is based upon shifting a total depth of said three dimensional images for said display so that said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is modified by offset toward or away from the viewer without modifying said total depth. wherein said adjustment is based upon shifting a total depth of said three dimensional images for said display so that said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is modified by offset toward or away from the viewer without modifying said total depth. Claim 8 Claim 8 wherein said shifting is a linear shifting. wherein said shifting is a linear shifting. Claim 9 Claim 9 wherein said shifting is a non-linear shifting. wherein said shifting is a non-linear shifting. Claim 10 Claim 10 wherein said adjustment is based upon shifting a total depth of said three dimensional images for said display so that said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is modified without increasing said total depth. wherein said adjustment is based upon shifting a total depth of said three dimensional images for said display so that said appearance of being in front of said place of said screen is modified without increasing said total depth. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-10 are objected to as being rejected on the grounds of non-statutory double patenting as discussed above, but would be allowable if the double patenting rejections were to be overcome, such as through the filing of a Terminal Disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not teach or suggest the combination of limitations presented in the independent claim, with specific regard to processing said depth map determined based upon (1) said neural network and (2) said two dimensional images to present three dimensional images on a display, wherein portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being behind a plane of a display screen of said display and other portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being in front said plane of said screen of said display, where said three dimensional images has a total depth including the apparent depth behind said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth behind said screen and the apparent depth in front of said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth in front of said screen, where said appearance of being in front of said plane of said display screen is greater than 15% of said total depth. The closest prior art of reference, Tech, G., Wegner, K., Chen, Y. & Yea, S. (April 2013). "3D- HEVC TEST MODEL 4", JCT3V-D1005-4TH Meeting: Incheon, KR, 20-26 Apr. 2013, discloses a method for conversion of a series of two dimensional images into a series of three dimensional images, comprising receiving said series of two dimensional images having pixels where each of said series of two dimensional images are from the same viewpoint, processing the series of two dimensional images and an associated depth map to determine respective displacements for each eye-view associated with each pixel. However, Tech et al. does not disclose processing said depth map determined based upon (1) said neural network and (2) said two dimensional images to present three dimensional images on a display, wherein portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being behind a plane of a display screen of said display and other portions of said series of three dimensional images has the appearance of being in front said plane of said screen of said display, where said three dimensional images has a total depth including the apparent depth behind said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth behind said screen and the apparent depth in front of said screen based upon a maximum value capable of being included within said depth map for the apparent depth in front of said screen, where said appearance of being in front of said plane of said display screen is greater than 15% of said total depth. 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.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Izumi – U.S. Publication No. 2011/0134109 An et al. – U.S. Publication No. 2014/0065902 Berretty et al. – U.S. Publication No. 2006/0078180 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER B EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)272-2738. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Sathyanarayanan Perungavoor can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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. /TYLER B. EDWARDS/ Examiner Art Unit 2488 /ZAIHAN JIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Apr 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12581042
EVENT RECOGNITION SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561983
SENSOR PROCESSING METHOD, APPARATUS, COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT, AND AUTOMOTIVE SENSOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556689
INTRA PREDICTION METHOD AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12552316
VEHICULAR MIRROR CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556693
INTRA PREDICTION METHOD AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
77%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+14.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 468 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month