Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 19/050,740

CAMERA DISPLAY SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 11, 2025
Priority
Feb 15, 2024 — provisional 63/553,823
Examiner
FULLER, RODNEY EVAN
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Sennco Solutions Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
1121 granted / 1337 resolved
+23.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1355
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
§103
32.7%
-7.3% vs TC avg
§102
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1337 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show ref.# 20 (paragraph 0018) as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 2, 6, 9 and 10 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 2 recites the limitation "the rail mount" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 includes the limitation “a camera rail including the channel” is unclear as to what structure is being defined and thus indefinite. Claim 9 includes the limitation “an other of the base and the mount” is unclear if the base, the mount or “an other” structure is being claimed. Claim 10 depends from claim 9 and include the deficiencies of claim 9. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Alexander, et al. (US 2012/0043451). PNG media_image1.png 320 239 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 301 388 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 368 481 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Alexander discloses “a base (Fig. 1, ref.# 14; a mount (Fig. 3, ref.# 10) configured to attach to a camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15), wherein the mount is connectable and is lockable with respect to the base (Fig. 3, ref.# 14); and a camera shroud (Fig. 1, ref.# 30) positioned over one or more releases of the camera, the camera shroud (Fig. 5, ref.# 30) affixed to the base and/or the mount (Fig 5, ref.# 16).” Regarding claim 2, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud (Fig. 3, ref.# 30) is secured between the [rail] mount (Fig. 3, ref.# 12, 16) and the camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15).” Regarding claim 3, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud (Fig. 1, ref.# 30) extends upwards from the base (Fig. 1, ref.# 14) and/or the mount (Fig. 1, ref.# 16) to cover the one or more releases (paragraphs 0010, 0034 of the camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15).” Regarding claim 4, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud (Fig. 1, ref.# 30) includes a curved receiver (Fig. 1, ref.# 28) configured to receive a lens of a camera.” (paragraph 0031) Regarding claim 5, Alexander discloses “wherein the base includes a channel (Fig. 5, ref.# 24), and the mount includes a rail (Fig. 5, ref.# 20) configured to fit into the channel.” Regarding claim 6, Alexander discloses “a camera rail including the channel, wherein the camera rail is configured to attach to the base.” (See fig. 5) Regarding claim 7, Alexander discloses “wherein the rail slides within the channel.” (See Fig. 5) Regarding claim 8, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud (Fig. 3, ref.# 30) is secured between the camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15) and the rail mount (Fig. 3, ref.16).” Regarding claim 9, Alexander discloses “wherein one of the base and the mount includes a lock (Fig. 5, ref.# 32), and another of the base and the mount (Fig. 10, ref.# 16) includes a lock receiver (Fig. 10, ref.# 54).” Regarding claim 10, Alexander discloses “wherein the base includes a channel (Fig. 5, ref.# 24), the mount includes a rail (Fig. 5, ref.# 20) that slides into the channel, an end of the mount includes an elbow (Fig. 10, ref.# 16: side), and the elbow includes the lock receiver.” Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexander, et al. (US 2012/0043451) in view of Johnston, et al. (US 2016/0235217). Regarding claim 11, Alexander discloses “a base (Fig. 1, ref.# 14) including a camera rail (Fig. 1, ref.# 20); a rail mount configured to attach to a camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15),”…; “and a camera shroud (Fig. 1, ref.# 30) positioned over one or more releases of the camera (paragraph 0010, 0030), the camera shroud (Fig. 1, ref.# 30) affixed to one or more of the camera rail, the base, and the rail mount (Fig. 5, ref.#16).” Alexander does not teach (Claim 11): “wherein the rail mount is slideable with respect to the rail and lockable with respect to the base and the rail”, (Claim 15) “wherein the camera rail includes opposing channels on opposing sides, and the rail mount includes opposing rails each configured to fit into one of the opposing channels”, (Claim 16) “wherein the camera rail is separate from and configured to attach to the base” and (Claim 17) “wherein the opposing rails slide within the opposing channels.” However, the use of a system to display a camera that includes a sliding rail and a rail mount with an associated lock was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Johnston (See Figs. 4, 5A, 15). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Alexander to include “wherein the rail mount is slideable with respect to the rail and lockable with respect to the base and the rail”, “wherein the camera rail includes opposing channels on opposing sides, and the rail mount includes opposing rails each configured to fit into one of the opposing channels”, “wherein the camera rail is separate from and configured to attach to the base” and “wherein the opposing rails slide within the opposing channels” in order to allow for a quick release mechanism that allows for easy exchange of different cameras to the lockable display system. Regarding claim 12, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud (Fig. 3, ref.# 30) is secured between the rail mount (Fig. 3, ref.# 16) and the camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15)”. Regarding claim 13, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera (Fig. 1, ref.# 30) shroud extends upwards from the base (Fig. 1, ref.# 14) and the rail mount (Fig. 1, ref.# 16) to cover the one or more releases (paragraphs 10, 34) of the camera.” Regarding claim 14, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud includes a curved receiver (Fig. 1, ref.# 28) configured to extend partially around a lens of a camera.” (paragraph 0031) Regarding claim 18, Alexander discloses “wherein the camera shroud includes a shroud rail configured to fit against the rail mount (See Fig. 5), and the camera shroud (Fig. 3, ref.# 30) is secured between the camera (Fig. 3, ref.# 15) and the rail mount (Fig. 3, ref.# 160.” Regarding claim 19, Alexander discloses “wherein one of the base and the rail mount includes a lock (Fig. 5, ref.# 32), and an other of the base and the rail mount (Fig. 10, ref.# 16) includes a lock receiver (Fig. 10, ref.# 54).” Regarding claim 20, Alexander discloses “wherein the rail mount slides within the opposing channels (See claim 11), an end of the rail mount includes an elbow (Fig. 10, ref.# 16: side) configured to extend around an end of the cameral rail, and the elbow includes the lock receiver (Fig. 10, ref.# 54).” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Green, et al. (US 9,402,486), Kim (EP 2945134), Reynolds, et al. (US 2014/0059828), Johnston, et al. (US 2012/0192600), Marszalek, et al. (US 7,593,142) and Marszalek, et al. (US 2007/0152819) teach a camera display system for mounting a camera on a retail shelf. Green (WO 2015/066134) teaches a camera display system for mounting a camera that includes a shroud to cover the lens release of a camera. Sterns, et al. (US 8,210,757) and Welt (US 3,423,056) teach a rail mounting system for a camera. Leyden (US 4,623,765) teach a rail mounting system with a lock. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2118. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:30 pm, Monday - Friday. 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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. /RODNEY E FULLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 July 20, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 11, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12699306
CAMERA MODULE
2y 3m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12693581
CAMERA RAIL POSITIONERS
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12693353
SAR VALUE ACQUISITION METHOD IN MRI, SAR VALUE ACQUISITION SYSTEM, ELECTRONIC APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12687595
DIGITAL LOCK-IN FOR MAGNETIC IMAGING WITH NITROGEN VACANCY CENTERS IN DIAMONDS
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12687513
Cooking Appliance and Humidity Sensor for Same
2y 6m 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
84%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+7.9%)
2y 2m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1337 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