Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/225,846

FILTERING OF GAZE TRACKING INFORMATION TO TRIGGER READING CONTROL MODE

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Jun 02, 2025
Examiner
NEUPANE, KRISHNA P.
Art Unit
2629
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Sony Interative Entertainment Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
285 granted / 386 resolved
+11.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
401
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
54.8%
+14.8% vs TC avg
§102
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
§112
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 386 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
DETAILED ACTION Status 1. This Office Action is responsive to claims filed for Application No. 19225846 on June 02, 2025. Please note claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined. 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 . Double Patenting 3. 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. 4. Claims 1-15 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 8-16, 18 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12346497. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the broader claim limitations of claims 1-15 of the current application is met by the narrower claim limitations if claims 1-5, 8-16, 18 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12346497 as shown in the following tables. Instant Application U.S. Patent No. 12346497 1. A method of controlling a computer program, comprising: presenting one or more images on a display device in response to execution of the computer program on a computing device; collecting gaze tracking information corresponding to a location of a user's gaze with respect to the one or more images presented on the display device; analyzing the gaze tracking information to detect a pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading; and upon detecting the pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading, activating a first mode in which the user's gaze triggers commands affecting execution of the computer program. 1. A method of controlling a computer program, comprising: presenting one or more images on a display device in response to execution of the computer program on a computing device; collecting gaze tracking information over time corresponding to a location of a user's gaze with respect to the one or more images presented on the display device; analyzing the gaze tracking information over time to detect a pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading; and upon detecting the pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading, activating a reading control mode in which location and duration of the user's gaze triggers commands affecting execution of the computer program. 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 8 7 9 8. A system for controlling a computer program, comprising: one or more storage media storing instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to cause the system to: present one or more images on a display device in response to execution of the computer program on a computing device; collect gaze tracking information corresponding to a location of a user's gaze with respect to the one or more images presented on the display device; analyze the gaze tracking information to detect a pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading; and upon detecting the pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading, activate a first mode in which the user's gaze triggers commands affecting execution of the computer program. 10. A system for controlling a computer program, comprising: a processor; a memory coupled to the processor; processor-executable instructions embodied in the memory and executable by the processor, wherein the instructions are configured to implement a method upon execution by the processor, the method comprising: presenting one or more images on a display device in response to execution of the computer program on a computing device; collecting gaze tracking information over time corresponding to a location of a user's gaze with respect to the one or more images presented on the display device; analyzing the gaze tracking information over time to detect a pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading; and upon detecting the pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading, activating a reading control mode in which location and duration of the user's gaze triggers commands affecting execution of the computer program. 9 11 10 12 11 13 12 15 13 16 14 18 15 19 5. Claims 16-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12346497. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: Instant Application U.S. Patent No. 12346497 16. A method of controlling a computer program, comprising: presenting one or more images on a display device in response to execution of the computer program on a computing device; collecting gaze tracking information corresponding to a location of a user's gaze with respect to the one or more images presented on the display device; analyzing the gaze tracking information to detect a pattern of the user's gaze inconsistent with reading; and upon detecting the pattern of the user's gaze inconsistent with reading, activating a first mode in which the user's gaze triggers commands affecting execution of the computer program. 1. A method of controlling a computer program, comprising: presenting one or more images on a display device in response to execution of the computer program on a computing device; collecting gaze tracking information over time corresponding to a location of a user's gaze with respect to the one or more images presented on the display device; analyzing the gaze tracking information over time to detect a pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading; and upon detecting the pattern of the user's gaze characteristic of reading, activating a reading control mode in which location and duration of the user's gaze triggers commands affecting execution of the computer program. 17 2 18 3 19 4 20 5 As illustrated in above, although the claims 1-5 at issue of U.S. Patent No. 12346497 not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claimed invention of instant claims 16-20 and patented claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12346497 has similar intended scope and obvious variations. The difference of the claims 16-20 of instant application and claims 1-5 of U.S. patent No. 12346497 is detecting the user’s gaze inconsistent with reading versus user’s gaze characteristic of reading, which is obvious variation of act/process for determining user’s aspects of reading. Hence, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify claims 16-20 of the present application to be similar scope claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12346497 in order to control the electronic device based on user’s aspects of reading. Examiner’s Note 6. In addition to non-statutory double patenting rejection, and updated search was performed for prior art rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102/103. However, none of closest prior arts Froy et al (US Pat. No. 9,773,372 B2), Maltz et al. (US 20120019662 A1), Olsson et al. (US 20140268054 A1), Geiss et al. (US 20150084864 A1), Venable (US 20150193018 A1) and Lopez (US 9791927 B2) neither anticipates nor renders obviousness the limitations of the independent claims substantially similar to the patented claims of U.S. Patent No. 12346497. Conclusion 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNA P. NEUPANE whose telephone number is (571)270-7291. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:30am-5:30pm. 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, BENJAMIN C. LEE can be reached on (571) 272-2963. 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. /KRISHNA P NEUPANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 02, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591332
SINGLE-CHIP DEVICE FOR DRIVING A PANEL INCLUDING FINGERPRINT SENSING PIXELS, DISPLAY PIXELS AND TOUCH SENSORS, ELECTRONIC MODULE THEREFOR, AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS INCLUDING THE SINGLE-CHIP DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591309
HAPTIC FEEDBACK SUBSTRATE AND HAPTIC FEEDBACK APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12572235
ELECTRONIC DEVICE HAVING A SENSOR LAYER WITH A VARIABLE REPORT INTERVAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566582
DISPLAY METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12561020
TOUCH DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
74%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+14.6%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 386 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