Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/919,390

Virtual Set Top

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 17, 2024
Examiner
SALTARELLI, DOMINIC D
Art Unit
2421
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Synamedia Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
658 granted / 838 resolved
+20.5% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
856
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§103
43.7%
+3.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 838 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
zccxDETAILED 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 . 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,418,851. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Application No. 18/919,390 Claim 1 U.S. Patent No. 11,418,851 Claim 1 A method comprising: A method comprising: at one or more servers hosting a user interface (UI) engine and a pool of encoders, wherein the one or more servers include one or more processors and a non-transitory memory: at a device including one or more processors and a non-transitory memory: distributing a first stream that includes a plurality of frames; receiving a request for a user interface (UI) from a client; generating a second stream in response to receiving the request, including: preparing the pool of encoders by re-encoding a plurality of frames from a common stream with varying delays relative to the common stream, wherein the common stream is streamed to a plurality of clients; locating an encoder to encode the plurality of frames into the second stream based on the first stream, wherein the encoder is selected based on an offset of decoded position at the client relative to the first stream, selecting an encoder from the pool of encoders in response to a request for a UI from a client among the plurality of clients; (see above) accelerating re-encoding of the plurality of frames by the selected encoder up to a switchover point and encoding a rendered UI generated by the UI engine blended with the plurality of frames starting at the switchover point into a unique stream; and instructing the encoder to accelerate encoding of the plurality of frames, and facilitating blending of the UI into the second stream with the plurality of frames; and switching the client from the common stream to the unique stream at the switch point. switching the client from the first stream to the second stream. Claims 2-20 correspond to claims 2-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,418,851 and are similarly unpatentable. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,177,529. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Application No. 18/919,390 Claim 1 U.S. Patent No. 12,177,529 Claim 1 A method comprising: A method comprising: at one or more servers hosting a user interface (UI) engine and a pool of encoders, wherein the one or more servers include one or more processors and a non-transitory memory: at one or more servers hosting user interface (UI) engines for rendering UIs and encoders for encoding or re-encoding the rendered UIs, wherein the one or more servers include one or more processors and a non-transitory memory: preparing the pool of encoders by re-encoding a plurality of frames from a common stream with varying delays relative to the common stream, wherein the common stream is streamed to a plurality of clients; instructing the encoders to obtain the plurality of frames in the common stream and encode the plurality of frames with varying delays relative to the common stream; selecting an encoder from the pool of encoders in response to a request for a UI from a client among the plurality of clients; instructing an encoder, selected from the encoders and different from the common encoder, accelerating re-encoding of the plurality of frames by the selected encoder up to a switchover point and encoding a rendered UI generated by the UI engine blended with the plurality of frames starting at the switchover point into a unique stream; and to accelerate encoding of a plurality of frames up to a switchover point and encode the rendered personalized UI blended with the plurality of frames starting at the switchover point in a unique stream for the client; switching the client from the common stream to the unique stream at the switch point. and updating at least one link in a manifest to the client to switch the client from the common stream to the unique stream at the switchover point to trigger the client to decode and display the unique stream in the viewing session without re-rendering the personalized UI. Claims 2-20 correspond to claims 2-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,177,529 and are similarly unpatentable. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 are allowable over the prior art. Applicant’s claims invention is drawn to the same invention as claimed in U.S. Patent No. 11,418,851 and U.S. Patent No. 12,177,529 as shown above. As stated previously in the prosecution history of said applications, the prior art does not appear to teach or reasonably suggest at the time of effective filing applicant’s invention of performing accelerated encoding of a plurality of streams with varying delays relative to a common stream for the purpose of presenting unique personalized user interfaces to requesting clients. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC D SALTARELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-7302. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at (571) 272-1915. 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. /DOMINIC D SALTARELLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597329
CELLULAR AND LOCAL AREA NETWORK (LAN) CONVERTERS FOR PREMISES MONITORING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597895
LOW-NOISE AMPLIFIER WITH MOM Q ENHANCEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593095
BROADCAST RECEIVING APPARATUS AND DISPLAY CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587722
SYSTEMS, METHOD AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM FOR GENERATING EROTIC MULTIMEDIA CONTENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575903
CONTROL SYSTEM FOR SURGICAL ROBOT SYSTEM WITH SAFETY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
78%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+16.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 838 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