Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 19/325,130

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ENHANCED IMAGE SENSOR TIMING

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Sep 10, 2025
Priority
Sep 18, 2018 — provisional 62/732,718 +3 more
Examiner
SHAHNAMI, AMIR
Art Unit
2483
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Intuitive Surgical Operations Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allowance Rate
374 granted / 456 resolved
+24.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
470
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
§103
54.7%
+14.7% vs TC avg
§102
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 456 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 are pending for examination. 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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim under US PRO 62/732718 filed on 9/18/2018. Double Patenting The non-statutory 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 time-wise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory 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, 140F.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 USPQ645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ761 (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 non-statutory 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 §§ 706.02(l)(l) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms.Thefiling date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AI A/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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7-11, 21-25, 27, 29, 31, 32 of U.S. Patent No. 11,671,581. Although the claims at issue are not identical because the present invention is broader than the US Patent, where the US Patent claims a second image sensor and second frame timer, and the independent claims of the US Patent does not claim said sensor/timer. However, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both language teaching a frame timer coupled to the image sensor, the frame timer configured to cause the image sensor to: capture, using the first plurality of pixels, a first plurality of frames of pixel data at a first frame rate; and capture, using the second plurality of pixels, a second plurality of frames of pixel data at a second frame rate different than the first frame rate; a visible light color filter array comprising a plurality of individual visible light color filters; and an alternative light filter array comprising a plurality of individual alternative light filters, one individual alternative light filter of the plurality of individual alternative light filters covering both a first pixel of the first plurality of pixels and a second pixel of the second plurality of pixels; each of the plurality of individual visible light color filters covering a different pixel in the first plurality of pixels and the second plurality of pixels, the pixels covered by individual visible light color filters of the plurality of individual visible light color filters being different from pixels covered by the individual alternative light filters. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 would be allowable if a terminal disclaimer is filed to overcome the double patent rejection set forth in this Office action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Brueckner, US 2018/0188427 A1 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIR SHAHNAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-0707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm. 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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 571-272-7383. 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. /AMIR SHAHNAMI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 10, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12739392
QUANTIZATION PARAMETER CODING
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12739409
LUMA MAPPING WITH CHROMA SCALING ADAPTATION PARAMETER SET IN VIDEO CODING
1y 8m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12725432
OBJECT DETECTION DEVICE
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12726619
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENCODING/DECODING AN IMAGE BASED ON IN-LOOP FILTER
1y 8m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12720092
IMPLICIT TRANSFORM SELECTION
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
82%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+9.8%)
2y 3m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 456 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