Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/098,609

PROCEDURAL ANIMATION ENGINE AND EDITOR FOR SAMPLE-BASED DESIGN OF STYLIZED WALKING GAITS FOR BIPEDAL ROBOTS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Apr 02, 2025
Priority
Mar 22, 2022 — continuation of 12/293,445
Examiner
NGUYEN, THUY-VI THI
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Disney Enterprises Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
Est. Remaining
63%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allowance Rate
396 granted / 773 resolved
-8.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
794
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
§103
67.5%
+27.5% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 773 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 . This is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on 4/2/25, wherein: Claims 1-20 are currently pending. 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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. (US 12,293,445). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims 1-20 of the copending and claims 1-22 of the US Patent (US 12,293,445) show e.g. a memory storing: a plurality of animation styles, and a sample motion for the robotic device, wherein the sample motion complies with kinematic and dynamic constraints associated with the robotic device; a processing element in communication with the memory; an animation engine executed by the processing element, wherein the animation engine receives: a target kinematic state of at least a portion of the robotic device, a selection of at least one of the plurality of animation styles, and a real or simulated state of the robotic device; and wherein the animation engine generates at least one actuator command configured to modify the sample motion based on the target kinematic state, the selected at least one of the plurality of animation styles, and the real or simulated state of the robotic device. Although claims 1-22 of US Patent No. (US 12,293,445) have additional features. However, it has been held that deleting elements when the function of element is not desired is obvious. See MPEP 2144.04 Section II. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify or to omit the additional elements of claims 1-22 of the US Patent No. US 12,293,445 to arrive at the claims 1-20 of the copending because the person would have realized that the remaining element would perform the same functions as before. “Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform same functions as before.” See In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184, decide Jan 16, 1963, Appl. No. 6857, U. S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhao et al (US 2020/0143093): A method includes simulating one or more states of a movable object by implementing a movable object model. Each simulated state is associated with simulated state data of the movable object. Horn et al (US 10,420,100): An animation preset graphical user interface (GUI) enables users to select a 3D model of an object and to further select between multiple animation presets that each individually cause a 3D animation engine to apply combinations of animation features against the 3D model. Brenner (US 2006/0108958): Holding arrangement having a device for actively damping vibration; Takenaka et al (US 2005/0075755): Gait generation device for legged mobile robot; Yoshiiki et al (US 2011/0301756): Control device for legged mobile robot; Kim et al (US 2016/0243699): Method for developing and controlling a robot to have movements matching an animation character; Lavalley et al (US 2020/0369333): Legged high dexterity self balancing capable robot actor. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kira Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-1614. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 9:00-5:00 ET. 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, Khoi Tran can be reached on 571-272-6919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KIRA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 02, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12667959
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EXECUTING AN ASSEMBLY TASK BY MEANS OF A ROBOT
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12669794
Implementing Rendered Fabrication Results with Computer Numerically Controlled Machines Based on Natural Language Descriptions of Desired Fabrication Results
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12661785
ROBOT CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS, ROBOT, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12661804
GROUND BASED ROBOT WITH AN OGI CAMERA MODULE AND COOLING SYSTEM
2y 8m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654310
Software Compensated Robotics
3y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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
51%
Grant Probability
63%
With Interview (+11.5%)
3y 8m (~2y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 773 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