Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/304,390

BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
Aug 19, 2025
Priority
Dec 18, 2019 — provisional 62/949,803 +2 more
Examiner
MISHLER, ROBIN J
Art Unit
2628
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
NextMind SAS
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 8m
Est. Remaining
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allowance Rate
502 granted / 723 resolved
+7.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
745
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
76.2%
+36.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 723 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 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. Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as it is drawn to transitory media (i.e. signals, carrier waves, etc.). While the applicants appear to be attempting to claim an article of manufacture which would qualify as one of the four statutory categories of invention, the applicants' language “machine storage medium,” covers both non-transitory computer readable storage media and transitory computer readable storage media, such as, signals (See MPEP 2111.01). Signals are, per se, non-statutory embodiments. Examiner respectfully notes that amending the claim language from “machine storage medium” to “non-transitory machine storage medium” would resolve the above 35 U.S.C. 101 issues. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Furman (US 2020/0356171). Regarding claim 1, Furman discloses a method of operating a brain computer interface system, comprising: displaying, by a display unit (HMD 110b in fig. 1B), image data (see Field of View in fig. 1B) including a plurality of objects (see 107 and 109 in fig. 1B and para. 24); generating, by a stimulus generator (155, fig. 1B), a visual stimulus (230, fig. 2) having a characteristic modulation corresponding to each of the plurality of objects (para. 32, 43, 50); receiving neural signals from a neural signal capture device (151 in fig. 1B and para. 313); determining an object of focus from the plurality of objects based on detecting a correlation between the neural signals and the characteristic modulation of the visual stimulus corresponding to the object of focus (see 220-230 in fig. 2 and para. 38); and displaying a feedback element (see Animation in fig. 8B) for the object of focus, wherein the feedback element transitions from an orderless distribution of visual elements (see point object in para. 77 and fig. 8B; also see multiple units in para. 44) to an ordered distribution forming a recognizable shape (see tesseract in para. 77 and fig. 8B) based on a strength of the correlation between the neural signals and the characteristic modulation (para. 53, 55; wherein e.g. the longer the user focuses on an object the more the object modulates/changes). Regarding claim 2, Furman discloses wherein the characteristic modulation is selectively applied to a high spatial frequency (HSF) component of the visual (para. 32, 31, 83; wherein the user is looking at the object that is being modulated). Regarding claim 3, Furman discloses wherein the feedback element varies as a linear function of the strength of the correlation (para. 55, 53; wherein the shape of the object is adjusted at a set frequency corresponding to the set time scales). Regarding claim 4, Furman discloses wherein the feedback element varies as a non- linear function of the strength of the correlation )para. 55-56; wherein the feature modulation is non-linear and includes pauses), and wherein the non-linear function is selected from a sigmoid function, a Rectified Linear Unit (RELU) function or a hyperbolic tangent function (para. 55-56). Regarding claim 5, Furman discloses wherein the recognizable shape is selected from a reticule, target mark (see square in para. 77 and fig. 8), or cross-hair. Regarding claim 6, Furman discloses wherein the characteristic modulation comprises a pseudo-random temporal pattern (para. 77; wherein a dot transforms into a tesseract) to reduce temporal overlap between patterns associated with different objects of the plurality of objects (para. 77, 44). Regarding claim 7, Furman discloses wherein the transition from the orderless distribution to the ordered distribution comprises step-wise changes (para. 77 and fig. 8B; wherein the a dot transforms into a tesseract). Claims 8-14 are rejected for the same reasons stated for claims 1-7, respectively. See above rejections. Claims 15- 20 are rejected for the same reasons stated for claims 1-6, respectively. See above rejections. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBIN J MISHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-7251. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F. 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, NITIN PATEL can be reached at (571)272-7677. 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. /ROBIN J MISHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 19, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684988
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674986
ADJUSTABLE DISPLAY ARRANGEMENT FOR EXTENDED REALITY DEVICES
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12676121
DISPLAY PANEL, DRIVING METHOD, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12675188
DISPLAY DEVICE AND TOUCH SENSING SYSTEM INCLUDING THE SAME
1y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12669905
TOUCH SENSOR AND DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
69%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+5.8%)
2y 7m (~1y 8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 723 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