Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 19/171,461

INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Apr 07, 2025
Priority
Mar 17, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2021010762 +2 more
Examiner
WALKER, MICHAEL JARED
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
NEC Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allowance Rate
165 granted / 292 resolved
-3.5% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
311
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§103
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§102
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 292 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION 1. Claims 1-14 are currently pending. The effective filing date of the present application is 3/17/2021. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Objections 3. Claim 1, 13, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1, 13, and 14 recite the limitation “determine payment information of the person:” the colon appears to be grammatically incorrect and a semicolon proper. Appropriate correction is required. Double Patenting 4. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,039,510. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because are broader in scope and the use of synonyms. 19/171,461 12,039,510 claims 1, 13, 14 1, 7 2 1 3 3 4 3 5 1 6 2 7 3 8 4 9 5 10 6 11 7 12 8 Subject Matter Free of Prior Art 6. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of subject matter free of prior art: The reason for subject matter free of prior art of claims 1-14 in the instant application is because the prior art of record fails to teach the overall combination as claimed. Therefore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior art to meet the combination above without unequivocal hindsight and one of ordinary skill would have no reason to do so. The nearest art, Okamoto 2020/0364752 and Nakamura 2022/0101296, does not teach receive a plurality of images of a person and a cart at a store; determine an item that the person placed in the cart based on the images; determine a price based on the item; and determine payment information of the person in light of the disclosure. Upon further searching the examiner could not identify any prior art to teach these limitations. The prior art on record, alone or in combination, neither anticipates, reasonably teaches, not renders obvious the Applicant' s claimed invention. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Notice of References Cited, PTO form 892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL JARED WALKER whose telephone number is (303)297-4407. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:00 AM -5:00 PM CT. 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, Fahd Obeid can be reached at (571)270-3324. 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. /MICHAEL JARED WALKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627 Michael.walker@uspto.gov
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 07, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749045
Inventory Management System Using Image Processing of Codes on Storage Bins
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12743644
SIMULATING QUANTUM COMPUTING CIRCUITS USING SPARSE STATE PARTITIONING
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12718210
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
3y 4m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12718302
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BASED GENERATION OF FINANCIAL REPORTS AND RESPONSES IN REAL-TIME
2y 6m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12718195
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR INVENTORY MANAGEMENT OF LIVESTOCK BASED ON IMAGE
2y 10m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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
56%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+29.0%)
2y 8m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 292 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