Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/060,711

CONTENT REPRODUCTION APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 23, 2025
Examiner
EKPO, NNENNA NGOZI
Art Unit
2425
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
420 granted / 589 resolved
+13.3% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
613
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§103
48.2%
+8.2% vs TC avg
§102
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 589 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The references listed in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on February 23, 2025 have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449 form). 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, 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thodeti et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0191640) in view Chang (U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0123794). Regarding claim 1, Thodeti et al. discloses a content reproduction apparatus configured to reproduce content in a vehicle (see paragraphs 0013, 0017; a vehicle infotainment head unit 102 that reproduces content (audio, media) in a vehicle), the apparatus comprising a microprocessor configured to perform (see fig. 2 (processor 206), paragraphs 0033, 0035; The infotainment head unit 102 also includes a processor 206 such as a system on a chip (SOC) processor): communicating with terminals carried by a plurality of occupants riding in the vehicle, via a wireless communication (see paragraphs 0021, 0030, 0032; communication with multiple smartphones and headsets carried by passengers. The wireless chipsets 202 and 204 may use a Bluetooth and/or WiFi communication protocol or other suitable wireless communication protocol); acquiring content managed by a terminal among the terminals, carried by a predetermined occupant among the plurality of occupants, via the wireless communication (see paragraphs 0037, 0045; The at least one speaker 120 may be disposed (or embedded) in the vehicle. The speaker 120 may output an audio signal to the interior of the vehicle), and reproducing the content (see paragraphs 0013, 0017; reproducing content via headsets or vehicle audio). However, Thodeti et al. is silent as to acquiring a conversation in the vehicle by the plurality of occupants as conversation information in a state where each of the plurality of occupants can be specified; detecting a conversation amount within a predetermined period based on the conversation information; when it is determined that the conversation amount within the predetermined period is less than a predetermined value. In an analogous art, Chang discloses acquiring a conversation in the vehicle by the plurality of occupants as conversation information in a state where each of the plurality of occupants can be specified (see paragraphs 0043, 0055-0058; acquiring conversation information per passenger; calculate a conversation rate for each passenger); detecting a conversation amount within a predetermined period based on the conversation information (see paragraphs 0079-0086, 0075-0077; detecting conversation amount (conversation rate) over a predetermined period. Calculate a conversation rate based on lip opening count); when it is determined that the conversation amount within the predetermined period is less than a predetermined value (see paragraphs 0076, 0086; In S220, the processor 140 may determine whether the lapse time is less than an atmosphere determination period Ta. the processor 140 may determine a conversation state value based on the average conversation rate Rt of all the passengers. The conversation state value may be determined between 0 and 10. When the conversation state value is 0, the processor 140 may determine that there is no conversation). It would have been obvious to skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the infotainment system of Thodeti et al. with the teaching of Chang’s conversation-state detection, the motivation being to improve user experience by adjusting content behavior based on passenger conversation levels. Regarding claim 4, Thodeti et al. and Chang discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Chang discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform: the detecting including specifying an occupant having a small conversation amount among the plurality of occupants (see paragraphs 0057, 0059); and Thodeti et al. discloses the acquiring of the content including acquiring content managed by the terminal carried by the occupant (see paragraph 0037). Regarding claim 5, Thodeti et al. and Chang discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Chang discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform: the detecting including specifying an occupant whose conversation amount is less than or equal to a predetermined value, among the plurality of occupants (see paragraphs 0057, 0059). Thodeti et al. discloses the acquiring of the content including acquiring content managed by the terminal carried by the occupant (see paragraph 0037). Regarding claim 6, Thodeti et al. and Chang discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Chang discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform: the detecting including specifying an occupant having a smallest number of utterances, among the plurality of occupants (see paragraphs 0010, 0057, 0059). Thodeti et al. discloses the acquiring of the content including acquiring content managed by the terminal carried by the occupant (see paragraph 0037). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thodeti et al. and Chang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mitsui (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0080011). Regarding claim 3, Thodeti et al. and Chang discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Thodeti et al. discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform the acquiring of the content including searching for content managed by the terminals carried by the plurality of occupants including a driver (see paragraph 0037). However, Thodeti et al. and Chang are silent as to wherein the microprocessor is configured to further perform acquiring destination information indicating a destination of the vehicle and tag information associated with the destination, using the tag information as a search keyword via the wireless communication. Mitsui discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to further perform acquiring destination information indicating a destination of the vehicle (see paragraph 0035) and tag information associated with the destination, using the tag information as a search keyword via the wireless communication (see paragraphs 0030, 0036, 0043). It would have been obvious to skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Thodeti et al. and Chang with the teaching of Mitsui, the motivation being to obtain contextual information. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thodeti et al. and Chang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vinjam et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0244873). Regarding claim 7, Thodeti et al. and Chang discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Thodeti et al. and Chang are silent as to wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform: the acquiring of the content including acquiring the content from among multiple pieces of content excluding video content in which people other than owners of the terminals appear. Vinjam et al. discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform: the acquiring of the content including acquiring the content from among multiple pieces of content excluding video content in which people other than owners of the terminals appear (see paragraphs 0009, 0013, 0024, 0054 and fig. 11). It would have been obvious to skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Thodeti et al. and Chang with the teaching of Vinjam et al., the motivation being to protect unknown face. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thodeti et al. and Chang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kurian (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0137263). Regarding claim 8, Thodeti et al. and Chang discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Thodeti et al. and Chang are silent as to wherein the microprocessor is configured to further perform: acquiring personal information from each of the terminals carried by the plurality of occupants via the wireless communication, and estimating a strength of a relationship between the plurality of occupants based on the personal information acquired from each of the terminals, wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform the acquiring of the content including determining a search range of content based on the strength of the relationship and acquiring the content according to the search range. Kurian discloses wherein the microprocessor is configured to further perform: acquiring personal information from each of the terminals carried by the plurality of occupants via the wireless communication (see paragraphs 0006, 0007), and estimating a strength of a relationship between the plurality of occupants based on the personal information acquired from each of the terminals (see paragraph 0026), wherein the microprocessor is configured to perform the acquiring of the content including determining a search range of content based on the strength of the relationship and acquiring the content according to the search range (see paragraph 0123). It would have been obvious to skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Thodeti et al. and Chang with the teaching of Kurian, the motivation being to obtaining privacy mode. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NNENNA NGOZI EKPO whose telephone number is (571)270-1663. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 10:00am - 6:30pm, TH-F 8:00am - 4:30pm. 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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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. NNENNA EKPO Primary Examiner Art Unit 2425 /NNENNA N EKPO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425 February 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 23, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598358
DYNAMIC SETTINGS ON A TELEVISION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593080
System and Method for Analyzing Videos in Real-Time
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581138
LIVE ROOM VIDEO PLAYBACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574582
PRIVACY-PRESERVING CONTENT DELIVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574597
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AGGREGATING CONTENT IDENTIFIERS IN A SUPER-INTERFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
71%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+20.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 589 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