Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/132,032

ELECTRONIC ENDOSCOPE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 22, 2025
Priority
Feb 16, 2023 — JP 2023-022720 +1 more
Examiner
FINDLEY, CHRISTOPHER G
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Hoya Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 9m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
593 granted / 765 resolved
+17.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
795
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
74.9%
+34.9% vs TC avg
§102
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
§112
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 765 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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. Claim(s) 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yabe et al. (US 20170208236 A1) in view of Seto et al. (US 20120016200 A1). Re claim 1, Yabe discloses an electronic endoscope system comprising: an electronic endoscope including an image sensor configured to image by a rolling shutter method (Yabe: Fig. 1; Fig. 6; paragraph [0006]); a light emitting device that generates illumination light (Yabe: paragraph [0009], light source); a light emission driving unit that allows the light emitting device to perform a light emission operation on the basis of a signal of a level corresponding to an amplitude of a current allowed to flow through the light emitting device, a current setting signal for setting the current allowed to flow through the light emitting device (Yabe: Fig. 1, LED driving section 46; Fig. 6, LED driving section 46; : paragraph [0044], control section 41 outputs light adjustment information for controlling the respective LEDs 42 to 45 to the LED driving section 46 to control the duty ratios and current levels of the PWM pulses and performs light adjustment control of the respective LEDs 42 to 45); and a control unit that controls the current setting signal in such a manner that a level of the current setting signal rises from zero before a light emission start time of a frame when the image sensor images (Yabe: Fig. 1, control section 41; Fig. 6, control section 41; : paragraph [0044], control section 41 outputs light adjustment information for controlling the respective LEDs 42 to 45 to the LED driving section 46 to control the duty ratios and current levels of the PWM pulses and performs light adjustment control of the respective LEDs 42 to 45). Yabe does not specifically disclose that the image sensor is configured to image a biological tissue. However, Seto discloses an endoscope system, wherein an endoscope system is used to observe tissue within a body cavity. Since Yabe and Seto relate to endoscope systems, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the tissue imaging of Seto with the system of Yabe in order to provide an endoscope system which is capable of controlling the beam quantity of a radiation beam properly in a broad dynamic range according to the type of an imaging device mounted on an endoscope (Seto: paragraph [0016]). Re claim 2, Yabe discloses control section 41 outputs light adjustment information for controlling the respective LEDs 42 to 45 to the LED driving section 46 to control the duty ratios and current levels of the PWM pulses and performs light adjustment control of the respective LEDs 42 to 45 (Yabe: paragraph [0044]), and control is performed in view of a minimum and maximum current (Yabe: Fig. 5B). Yabe does not explicitly disclose that the control unit controls the current setting signal so that a value of the current allowed to flow through the light emitting device before the light emission start time becomes 10 times or more a minimum value of a current that can be output by the light emitting device. However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would recognize that a threshold set to 10 times or more a minimum value of current constitutes an arbitrarily set value. Since Yabe supports minimum and maximum current values, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would be enabled to set the maximum current value to a level which provides sufficient differentiation between the minimum and maximum values. Therefore, a 10X differential would logically be in the purview of functionality for the system of Yabe. Thus, the limitation of claim 2 is rendered obvious in view of Yabe. Re claim 3, Yabe discloses wherein a first period in which the level of the current setting signal is set to a first level from a light emission start time of a first frame is set (Yabe: Fig. 5B; paragraph [0072]), and the level of the current setting signal is set to be negative in a predetermined period from an end time of the first period to a light emission start time of a second frame subsequent to the first frame (Yabe: Fig. 5B; paragraph [0072]). Re claim 4, Yabe discloses wherein a start time of the predetermined period is an end time of the first period or immediately after the end time (Yabe: Fig. 5B). Re claim 5, Yabe discloses wherein the control unit sets a first period in which the level of the current setting signal is set to a first level from a light emission start time of a first frame (Yabe: Fig. 5B; paragraph [0072]), and a second period in which the level of the current setting signal is set to a second level smaller than the first level from an end time of the first period (Yabe: Fig. 5B; paragraph [0072]), and sets the level of the current setting signal to be negative in a predetermined period from an end time of the second period to a light emission start time of a second frame subsequent to the first frame (Yabe: Fig. 5B; paragraph [0072]). Re claim 6, Yabe discloses wherein a start time of the predetermined period is an end time of the second period or immediately after the end time (Yabe: Fig. 5B). Re claim 7, Yabe discloses a plurality of the light emitting devices (Yabe: Fig. 1, LEDs 42-45; Fig. 6, LEDs 42-45; paragraph [0092]); and a plurality of the light emission driving units that allows a corresponding light emitting device among the plurality of the light emitting devices to perform a light emission operation (Yabe: paragraph [0092], LED driving section 46 configured to generate driving currents for the LEDs 42 to 45), wherein when light generated by each light emitting device by the light emission start time is set as first light, the control unit adjusts the current setting signal for each light emitting device so that a light amount ratio of a light amount of the first light to a predetermined reference light amount becomes the same among the plurality of light emitting devices or falls within a predetermined allowable variation value before the biological tissue is imaged (Yabe: paragraphs [0047]-[0049] and [0059]). Re claim 8, Yabe discloses a light amount acquisition unit that acquires a light amount of the first light and the reference light amount on the basis of a first image of an object obtained when the object serving as a reference is irradiated with the first light and a second image of the object obtained when the object is irradiated with the first light and second light, which is light generated by each light emitting device after the light emission start time before the biological tissue is imaged (Yabe: paragraph [0047], the control section 41 calculates light adjustment information corresponding to a light amount value of the G-LED 43 that should be set according to the brightness control information supplied from the video processor 20 and, concerning the other LEDs 42, 44, and 45), wherein the control unit calculates the light amount ratio with respect to each light emitting device on the basis of the light amount acquired by the light amount acquisition unit (Yabe: paragraph [0047], the control section 41 calculates light adjustment information corresponding to a light amount value of the G-LED 43 that should be set according to the brightness control information supplied from the video processor 20 and, concerning the other LEDs 42, 44, and 45). Re claim 9, Yabe discloses that the control unit adjusts a time at which the level of the current setting signal rises from zero so that a peak level of the current setting signal for generating the first light becomes a predetermined value (Yabe: Figs. 7A and 7B). Contact Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER G FINDLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM. 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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571)272-7331. 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. /CHRISTOPHER G FINDLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12676983
IMAGE ENCODING/DECODING METHOD AND DEVICE, AND RECORDING MEDIUM IN WHICH BITSTREAM IS STORED
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12676966
TMVP DERIVATION
1y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12666033
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR DECODING AND ENCODING POINT CLOUD DATA
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12659503
VIDEO SIGNAL ENCODING AND DECODING METHOD, AND APPARATUS THEREFOR
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12652400
CODING OF INSTANTANEOUS DECODING REFRESH SUBPICTURES
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
78%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+11.6%)
2y 11m (~1y 9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 765 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