Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/993,005

STEREOSCOPIC IMAGE DISPLAY DEVICE AND STEREOSCOPIC IMAGE DISPLAY METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 10, 2025
Examiner
HUNTER, MISHAWN N
Art Unit
2484
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Sony Group Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
766 granted / 982 resolved
+20.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1004
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.6%
-29.4% vs TC avg
§103
45.6%
+5.6% vs TC avg
§102
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§112
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 982 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-9 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0043335) in view of Lee et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0157265). Consider claim 1. Kobayashi et al. discloses a stereoscopic image display device comprising: an image generation unit that generates a light field image at a predetermined viewpoint position (para. 0168 describes selecting a predetermined viewpoint from the viewpoint of the input image); and an image display unit that displays an image having a depth in each of both eyes of a user on a basis of the light field image (para. 0179 describes an image display unit that displays an image having a depth in each of both eyes of a user). However, Kobayashi et al. does not disclose a stereoscopic image display device comprising: an image generation unit that generates a light field image at a predetermined viewpoint position; and an image display unit that displays an image having a depth in each of both eyes of a user on a basis of the light field image Lee et al. teaches wherein the image display unit has a plurality of stacked display surfaces, and the plurality of display surfaces includes at least one first display surface and at least one second display surface having a higher light transmittance than the first display surface (para. 0059 describes a stacked display, including monochrome and color panels, with the monochrome panels having a higher transmittance than the color panels). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, wherein the image display unit has a plurality of stacked display surfaces, and the plurality of display surfaces includes at least one first display surface and at least one second display surface having a higher light transmittance than the first display surface, in order to alleviate a color distortion as suggested by the prior art. Consider claim 2. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein the second display surface is a monochrome display surface (para. 0057 describes a monochrome panel). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 3. . Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein two or more of the plurality of display surfaces are the first display surfaces (para. 0059 describes a stacked display, including monochrome and color panels). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 4. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein two or more of the plurality of display surfaces are the second display surfaces (para. 0059 describes a stacked display, including monochrome and color panels). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 5. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein light incident on the both eyes is transmitted through the second display surface and the first display surface in this order (fig. 1 shows that the image light is transmitted in the order of the third panel (130) and the first panel (110)). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 6. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein a resolution of each of the plurality of display surfaces is different (para. 0057 describes a monochrome panel). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 7. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of display surfaces includes a spatial light modulator (para. 0050 describes an LCD panel) The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 8. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of display surfaces includes an LCD (para. 0050 describes an LCD panel). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 9. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of display surfaces includes an OLED (para. 0051 describes an OLED panel) The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 13. Lee et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, further comprising: a shape acquisition unit that images a stereoscopic shape to obtain stereoscopic information, wherein the image generation unit generates the light field image on a basis of the stereoscopic information (paras. 0054-0056 describes generating the light field image on a basis of the stereoscopic information). The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above. Consider claim 14. Kobayashi et al. discloses the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 13, wherein the stereoscopic information includes luminance information, depth information, or both of the luminance information and the depth information (para. 0179 describes displaying an image having a depth in each of both eyes of a user). Consider claim 15. Kobayashi et al. discloses the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 1, wherein the display surface is a head mounted display disposed in front of the both eyes (para. 0183 describes glasses for 3D viewing). Claim 16 is rejected using similar reasoning as corresponding claim 1 above. Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0043335) in view of Lee et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0157265) in further view of Hua et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0283431). Consider claim 10. Kobayashi et al. and Lee et al. teaches all claimed limitations as stated above, except wherein the image display unit further includes an eyepiece. However, Hua et al. teaches wherein the image display unit further includes an eyepiece (para. 0037 describes an eyepiece). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, wherein the image display unit further includes an eyepiece, in order to optimize high-performance light field displays as suggested the prior art. Consider claim 11. Hua et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 10, wherein the image generation unit corrects the light field image according to a magnification or an aberration of the eyepiece, or both of the magnification and the aberration (para. 0041 describes an eyepiece is inserted to further magnify the 3D scene). The motivation to combine is the same as stated above in claim 10. Consider claim 12. Hua et al. teaches the stereoscopic image display device according to claim 10, wherein the eyepiece is a freeform surface prism (para. 0077 describes wherein the eyepiece is a freeform surface prism). The motivation to combine is the same as stated above in claim 10. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mishawn N Hunter whose telephone number is (571)272-7635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-4pm. 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, Thai Tran can be reached at 571-272-7382. 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. /MISHAWN N. HUNTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 10, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597446
AUTOMATIC BESPOKE EDITS OF VIDEO CONTENT USING AI
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597447
AN ONLINE COURSE DELIVERY FEEDBACK CONTENT EDITING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596243
LASER SCANNING MICROSCOPE WITH ELECTRICAL HIGH-ORDER MODULATION EXTRACTION MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594888
HITCH ANGLE DETECTION SYSTEM, HITCH ANGLE DETECTION DEVICE, AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592262
METHOD, APPARATUS, READABLE MEDIUM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR VIDEO PREVIEW
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
92%
With Interview (+14.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 982 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