Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/235,419

RETINA IMAGING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Jun 11, 2025
Priority
Mar 31, 2021 — provisional 63/168,353 +2 more
Examiner
PONTIUS, JAMES M
Art Unit
2488
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Raytrx LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
407 granted / 518 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
538
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
§112
14.9%
-25.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 518 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . Double Patenting 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,349,975. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Conclusion The prior art made of record, but not relied upon, that is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is found in the attached Notice of References Cited. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M PONTIUS whose telephone number is (571)270-7687. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-4. 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, Sath V Perungavoor can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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. /JAMES M PONTIUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 11, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684086
Method and system for using matrix code to display content
1y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676957
IMAGE SENSOR AND OPERATING METHOD OF IMAGE SENSOR
1y 8m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12671838
ADAPTIVE WAVELET TRANSFORM
2y 2m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12671817
METHOD AND MODULE FOR CONTROLLING CODE RATE OF ENCODER, AND CHIP, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
1y 6m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12659474
Unified Neural Network Filter Model
2y 8m 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
79%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+9.9%)
3y 1m (~2y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 518 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