Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/923,884

INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND RECORDING MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 23, 2024
Priority
Mar 15, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2021010305 +2 more
Examiner
SHIN, SOO JUNG
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
NEC Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
540 granted / 620 resolved
+27.1% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
643
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§103
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§102
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 620 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 . Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. 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 1-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,230,005 (S/N: 18/495,352). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the application and patent are directed to extracting keypoints of an iris of a target person, determining the center point of the iris, designating a rectangular area spreading from the center of the iris, and padding the image data to enlarge the image. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-9 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the Double Patenting rejection(s) set forth in this Office action and/or by filing a terminal disclaimer. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claims contain the same allowable subject matter as the parent application 18/495,352 (now U.S. Patent No. 12,230,005). The examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter can be also found in the Office action for 18/495,352 mailed on July 18, 2024 (see pages 3-4). In summary, the prior art of record teaches that it was known at the time the application was filed to detect an iris of a person by detecting the feature points in the acquired image, determining an area corresponding to the iris, and determining the centroid and diameter of the iris. However, the prior art, alone or in combination, does not appear to teach or suggest setting a target area designating a portion of the image having a rectangular shape, wherein the target area spreads from a position of the center of the iris and a size which is changed so that at least one of two sides of the target area that face with each other along the height direction is closer to the edge of the eyelid, and performing a padding processing for enlarging the image when a part of the target area does not overlap with the image so that the target area that does not overlap with the image overlaps the image. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOO J SHIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9753. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 10-6. 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, Matthew Bella can be reached at (571)272-7778. 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. /Soo Shin/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667 571-272-9753 soo.shin@uspto.gov
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12705917
AMBIGUITY RESOLUTION FOR OBJECT SELECTION AND FASTER APPLICATION LOADING FOR CLUTTERED SCENARIOS
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12705764
ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR ESTIMATING OPTICAL FLOW AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12694661
EXPLAINABLE VISUAL ATTENTION FOR DEEP LEARNING
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12694662
REINFORCEMENT LEARNING AGENT TO MEASURE ROBUSTNESS OF BLACK-BOX IMAGE CLASSIFICATION MODELS
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12688927
IMAGE FEATURE CLASSIFICATION
3y 2m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.3%)
2y 2m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 620 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