Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/030,685

SCOLIOSIS RECOGNITION SYSTEM AND METHOD BASED ON ACTIVE MILLIMETER WAVE IMAGING TECHNOLOGY

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 17, 2025
Priority
May 23, 2024 — CN 202410648978.2 +1 more
Examiner
WARSI, YASMEEN S
Art Unit
3791
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Anhui Yuanshuo Terahertz Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allowance Rate
208 granted / 345 resolved
-9.7% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+37.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
363
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 345 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the back", “the collected pressure”, “the standing posture”, “the control”, “the user”, “the scoliosis recognition”, “the scan progress”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the same", “the center”, “the pre-processed pressure”, “the standing posture”, “the user”, “the feedback information”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the pre- processed pressure", “the center”, “the two foot”, “the following formula”, “the left”, “the pressure value”, “the ith”, “the left foot”, “the plane”, “the number”, “the coordinate”, “the right foot”, “the jth”, “the right foot”, “the two foot”, “the contact area”, “the pressure distribution symmetry score”, “the requirements”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4 recites the limitation “the echo”, “the received”, “the same”, “the back”, “the human”, “the back key point”, “the depth”, “the 3D”, “the spine”, “the diagnosis”, “the calculated”, “the spine”, “the scoliosis recognition”, “the bilateral”, “the cobb”, “the severity”, “the corresponding”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 5 recites the limitation “the steps”, “the system”, “the user”, “the foot-type”, “the standing posture”, “the standard”, “the back”, “the human”, “the scoliosis recognition”, “the diagnosis”, “the medical”, “the treatment”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 recites the limitation “the standing posture”, “the user”, “the same”, “the center”, “the positions”, “the heel/the arch/the forefoot”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 recites the limitation “the echo”, “the scoliosis recognition result”, “the received echo”, “the same”, “the back” “the human body”, “the back key”, “the depth learning”, “the 3d data”, “the spine contour”, “the calculated Cobb angle”, “the bilateral acromion”, “the severity range”, “the corresponding medical suggestions”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 recites the limitation “the 3D”, “the back”, “the human body”, “the spine contour”, “the active contour”, “the internal energy”, “the smoothness”, “the curve”, “the external energy”, “the initial curve”, “the edge”, “the gradient size”, “the image gradient”, “the initial curve position”, “the gradient”, “the energy function”, “the real spine contour”, “the reduction”, “the energy function”, “the number”, “the iteration”, “the preliminary curve”, “the fitting curve”, “the cubic B-spline curve”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 contains the trademark/trade name “BlazePoze”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a depth learning algorithm and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YASMEEN S WARSI whose telephone number is (571)272-9942. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am to 5 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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at 571-272-4233. 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. /YASMEEN S WARSI/Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /MAY A ABOUELELA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12751654
Blood Draw Device with Anti-Buckling Feature
3y 4m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12740743
SYSTEM, METHOD AND COMPUTER-ACCESSIBLE MEDIUM FOR ANESTHESIA MONITORING USING ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHIC MONITORING
4y 5m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12741067
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING BLOOD DONATIONS
4y 1m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12740734
Blood Draw Device
3y 7m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12733896
DIGESTIVE CANAL SCANNING DEVICE, BODY SCANNING DEVICE, BODY SCANNING METHOD AND ACOUSTIC-BASED DIGESTIVE ORGAN MONITORING SYSTEM
4y 4m 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
60%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+37.2%)
3y 10m (~2y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 345 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