Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 21, 2026
Application No. 18/964,837

VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Dec 02, 2024
Priority
Apr 10, 2015 — JP 2015-080724 +5 more
Examiner
LE, BAO-LUAN Q
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Maxell Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
69%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allowance Rate
522 granted / 998 resolved
-15.7% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1050
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
59.1%
+19.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
§112
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 998 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 statements (IDS) submitted on 08/25/2025 and 12/02/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Objection/s to the Specification The title of the invention, “VEHICLE,” is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “IMAGE PROJECTION APPARATUS, OF A VEHICLE, THAT PROJECTS AN IMAGE ON A SURFACE.” 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 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. US 12196570 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims 1-5 anticipate all claim limitations of the pending claims 1-5. Pending claims Patented claims 1. A vehicle, having a projector for projecting an image, the vehicle comprising: a body; a sensor configured to acquire information related to the vehicle; and a projector configured to project the image based on the information acquired by the sensor onto a surface, wherein the image includes an information image and a peripheral image which is around the information image, and wherein the projector projects the image at different projection positions depending on a high beam state or a low beam state of a headlight when the headlight is being turned on. 1. An image projection apparatus, of a vehicle, that projects an image, the image projection apparatus comprising: a sensor configured to acquire information related to the vehicle; and a projector configured to project the image based on the information acquired by the sensor onto a surface, wherein the image includes an information image and a peripheral image which is around the information image, and wherein the projector projects the image at different projection positions depending on a high beam state or a low beam state of a headlight when the headlight is being turned on. 2. The vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the projector projects the information image with normal brightness when the headlight is turned off. 2. The image projection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the projector projects the information image with normal brightness when the headlight is turned off. 3. The vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the projector projects the information image with brightness higher than normal brightness when the headlight is being turned on. 3. The image projection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the projector projects the information image with brightness higher than normal brightness when the headlight is being turned on. 4. The vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the information image is an arrow image. 4. The image projection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the information image is an arrow image. 5. The vehicle according to claim 1, wherein a light source of the projector and a light source of the headlight are different from each other. 5. The image projection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a light source of the projector and a light source of the headlight are different from each other. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-5 contain allowable subject matter/s. Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art references, Kahler (US 20120044090 A1), Pan (US 20080198372 A1), Lai (US 20140203923 A1), Othmer (US 20140028980 A1), Son (US 20130010484 A1), do not teach, by themselves or in combination with one another, “the projector projects the image at different projection positions depending on a high beam state or a low beam state of a headlight when the headlight is being turned on.” Furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior art references to modify the references in such manner that results in the above claimed limitation/s; hence the invention as claimed by claim 1 is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Claims 2-5 depend, directly or indirectly, on claim 1; hence they are also allowable. Conclusion The prior art references cited in PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. 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. Any response to this action should be mailed to: Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 Or faxed to: (571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry) Or: (571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”) Hand-delivered responses should be brought to: Customer Service Window Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22314 /BAO-LUAN Q LE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 02, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12754464
PROJECTOR
3y 7m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12754468
ILLUMINATION SYSTEM AND PROJECTION DEVICE
2y 11m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12756805
CONTROL METHOD FOR PROJECTOR, PROJECTOR, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12742967
INCORPORATING COMPONENTS INSIDE OPTICAL STACKS OF HEADMOUNTED DEVICES
5y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12736867
PROJECTION SYSTEM AND PROJECTOR
3y 8m 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
52%
Grant Probability
69%
With Interview (+16.4%)
3y 1m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 998 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