Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/039,302

DYNAMIC REFRESH RATE SWITCHING SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jan 28, 2025
Examiner
BODDIE, WILLIAM
Art Unit
2625
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
26%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 11m
To Grant
47%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 26% of cases
26%
Career Allow Rate
50 granted / 193 resolved
-36.1% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 11m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
221
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
62.9%
+22.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 193 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,574,576 (Patent Serial No. 17/738876). A claim comparison of claims of the instant application and claims U.S. Patent No. 11,574,576. Application No. 19/039302 U.S. Patent No. 11,574,576 Independent claim 2 A system for dynamically updating a refresh rate, the system comprising: at least one processor; a first application and a second application; at least one user interface configured to present the first application and the second application, each of the first application and the second application executing at a first refresh rate; at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to: responsive to receiving a request from the second application to temporarily boost the first refresh rate, determine to temporarily boost the first refresh rate to a second refresh rate, wherein the second refresh rate is higher than the first refresh rate, control a scheduler, implemented on the at least one processor, to identify the second application as opted in to the second refresh rate and identify the first application as not opted in to the second refresh rate, control the scheduler to transmit a first signal to the first application to refresh first content presented on the user interface at the first refresh rate, wherein the first signal is transmitted in accordance with a virtualized refresh rate, control the scheduler to transmit a second signal to the second application to refresh second content presented on the user interface at the second refresh rate, wherein the second signal is transmitted in accordance with a non-virtualized refresh rate, and control the first application to refresh the first content at the first refresh rate upon receipt of the first signal and the second application to refresh the second content at the second refresh rate upon receipt of the second signal. Independent claim 1 A system comprising: a processor; a first application and a second application, each of the first application and the second application executing at a first refresh rate; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to: determine to temporarily boost the first refresh rate to a second refresh rate, wherein the second refresh rate is higher than the first refresh rate, transmit a first signal to the first application to refresh at the second refresh rate, transmit a second signal to the second application to maintain refreshing at the first refresh rate based on a type of content shown by the second application, and control the first application to refresh at the second refresh rate upon receipt of the first signal, and the second application to maintain refreshing at the first refresh rate upon receipt of the second signal. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent 11,574,576. For independent claims 2, 12, and 21, corresponding independent claims 1, 11 and 19 of U.S. Patent 11,574,576, and these claims are not patentably distinct from the Patent claims. For dependent the dependent claims, corresponding dependent claims 2-7 and 9-14 and 16-20 of U.S. Patent 12,317,066 mirror the limitations of the dependent claims and recite obvious variant. Therefore, Applicants’ claims are not patentably distinct from the Patent claims. Inquiries Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEJOON AHN whose telephone number is (571)272-9528. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 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, Nitin Patel can be reached at 571-272-7677. 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. /SEJOON AHN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 28, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589653
VEHICLE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573336
ELECTRONIC DEVICE WITH BETTER RESOLUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567373
PIXEL CIRCUIT AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557387
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12542116
INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
26%
Grant Probability
47%
With Interview (+21.0%)
4y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 193 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