Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 19/099,616

OCCUPANT IMAGING APPARATUS AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING OCCUPANT IMAGING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 29, 2025
Priority
Oct 21, 2022 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2022039226
Examiner
OWENS, TSION B
Art Unit
2487
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Mitsubishi Electric Mobility Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
588 granted / 669 resolved
+29.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
686
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§103
70.8%
+30.8% vs TC avg
§102
10.8%
-29.2% vs TC avg
§112
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 669 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 . 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 byt he manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (US 2021/0084212) (Kazuya Tamura) in view of Narushima et al. (US 2024/0308338) (Noriaki Narushima). Regarding Claim 1, Tamura discloses an occupant imaging apparatus, comprising: a board; an imager disposed on the board to image at least one occupant on a driver seat, a passenger's seat, or a rear seat of a vehicle [See abstract and Paragraphs 77-89 unit 7-8, 4, 4a, 4b]; and a plurality of light emitters disposed on the board to emit light to be directed to the at least one occupant [See Paragraphs 56-60, 85-91 and Figs. 5-7 e.g. unit 4a-b] and ,a light proof enclosure covering the imager and the plurality of light emitters, the light proof enclosure including a wall that prevents the light emitted from the plurality of light emitters from entering the imager, and the wall of the light proof enclosure is disposed between the imager and the plurality of light emitters [See Paragraphs 55-60 and Figs. 4-5]. Tamura doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of light emitters are located on one side of the imager in a vehicle- width direction of the vehicle. However, Narushima discloses wherein the plurality of light emitters are located on one side of the imager in a vehicle- width direction of the vehicle [See abstract and Paragraphs 39-40], It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Tamura to add the teachings in Narushima as above, to provide a device that reduced power consumption of the light source, enhanced convenience for the occupant and improved the visibility of the displayed virtual image [See Narushima Paragraphs 5]. Regarding Claim 2, Tamura discloses wherein the plurality of light emitters include a first light emitter and a second light emitter, the occupant imaging apparatus, further comprising a light guide to direct light from the first light emitter to the occupant on the driver seat, and direct light from the second light emitter to the occupant on the passenger's seat or the rear seat [See Paragraphs 56-60, 85-91 and Figs. 5-7 e.g. unit 4a-b]. Regarding Claim 3, Tamura discloses wherein the occupant imaging apparatus is disposed in a central portion of a front portion in a cabin of the vehicle [See Paragraphs 29-36 and Claim 9]. Regarding Claim 4, Tamura doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the occupant imaging apparatus is disposed to face the driver seat, and the plurality of light emitters include a first light emitter and a second light emitter, the occupant imaging apparatus, further comprising a light guide to direct light from the first light emitter to the occupant on the driver seat, and direct light from the second light emitter to the occupant on the driver seat in a range that differs in directing angle and directing distance from the light from the first light emitter However, Narushima discloses wherein the occupant imaging apparatus is disposed to face the driver seat, and the plurality of light emitters include a first light emitter and a second light emitter, the occupant imaging apparatus, further comprising a light guide to direct light from the first light emitter to the occupant on the driver seat, and direct light from the second light emitter to the occupant on the driver seat in a range that differs in directing angle and directing distance from the light from the first light emitter [See Paragraphs 35-43]. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Tamura to add the teachings in Narushima as above, to provide a device that reduced power consumption of the light source, enhanced convenience for the occupant and improved the visibility of the displayed virtual image [See Narushima Paragraphs 5]. Regarding Claim 5, Tamura doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of light emitters include a first light emitter and a second light emitter, the occupant imaging apparatus, further comprising a light guide to direct light from the first light emitter and light from the second light emitter in a same direction However, Narushima discloses wherein the plurality of light emitters include a first light emitter and a second light emitter, the occupant imaging apparatus, further comprising a light guide to direct light from the first light emitter and light from the second light emitter in a same direction [See Paragraphs 35-43]. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Tamura to add the teachings in Narushima as above, to provide a device that reduced power consumption of the light source, enhanced convenience for the occupant and improved the visibility of the displayed virtual image [See Narushima Paragraphs 5]. Regarding Claim 6, Tamura discloses wherein the plurality of light emitters include a first light emitter and a second light emitter, the occupant imaging apparatus, further comprising a light guide to direct light from the first light emitter and light from the second light emitter in different directions [See Paragraphs 85-90 and Fig. 7]. Regarding Claim 7, Tamura discloses a power circuit disposed on the board, the power circuit being electrically connected to the plurality of light emitters, wherein the power circuit is located on a same side as the plurality of light emitters with respect to the imager in a plan view of the board [See Paragraphs 56-70]. Regarding Claim 8, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here. Regarding Claim 9, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSION B OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00. 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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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. /TSION B OWENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 29, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
May 13, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12634479
MASKING A REGION OF MULTIMEDIA DATA
1y 11m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634463
IMAGE ENCODING/DECODING METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND RECORDING MEDIUM STORING BITSTREAM
1y 9m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12627793
IMAGE ENCODING/DECODING METHOD, METHOD OF TRANSMITTING BITSTREAM, AND RECORDING MEDIUM IN WHICH BITSTREAM IS STORED
1y 10m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12621494
SEI MESSAGE FOR GENERATIVE FACE VIDEO
2y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12621442
MOST PROBABLE MODE LIST GENERATION WITH TEMPLATE-BASED INTRA MODE DERIVATION AND DECODER-SIDE INTRA MODE DERIVATION
1y 10m to grant Granted May 05, 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
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+8.7%)
2y 1m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 669 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