Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/757,943

PIEZOELECTRIC ACTUATOR, LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD, AND RECORDING DEVICE

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Jun 24, 2022
Examiner
VALENCIA, ALEJANDRO
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Kyocera Corporation
OA Round
4 (Final)
42%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
48%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 42% of resolved cases
42%
Career Allow Rate
567 granted / 1335 resolved
-25.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
151 currently pending
Career history
1486
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1335 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claim recites a wide portion, a first narrow portion and a second narrow portion “in the width direction,” but portion does not itself have a direction. That is, a portion can have a width in a direction, but the portion has no directionality in itself. Further, the claim now recites wherein “no other wiring line among the plurality of wiring lines” extends between the electrodes. However, the plurality of wiring lines has been defined as extending between the electrodes, and thus to state that there could be a wiring line that is included in the plurality of wiring lines that does not extend between the electrodes would appear to contradict itself. Correction is required. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 10, 16, 17 and 20-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsuura (2011/0205309). Regarding claim 10, Matsuura teaches a piezoelectric actuator comprising: a piezoelectric layer (fig. 6, item 17a); and a conductor layer (figs. 6, item 18) that is provided directly or indirectly on the piezoelectric layer (see fig. 6), wherein, in a plan view (see figs. 6, 7), the conductor layer includes a plurality of individual electrodes (figs. 6, 7, items 19a) that are arranged with intervals therebetween (see figs. 6, 7), and a plurality of wiring lines (figs. 6, 7, items 19b/19d between each set of adjacent individual electrodes), each wiring line extending and no other wiring line among the plurality of wiring lines extending between the one individual electrode and the adjacent individual electrode (see illustration below), and wherein a width, in a width direction of the plan view, of conductive material of each wiring line differs at different positions in a length direction of the plan view, which is orthogonal to the width direction of the plan view, such that each wiring line of the plurality of wiring lines includes a wide portion (see illustration below) in the width direction of the plan view including a part positioned at a center of the wiring line in a length direction (see fig. 7, sub-scanning direction), and a first narrow portion (see illustration below) in the width direction of the plan view disposed between the wide portion and one individual electrode (fig. 7, individual electrode 19a closer to bottom of page) of the plurality of individual electrodes to which the wiring line is connected, a second narrow portion (see illustration below) in the width direction of the plan view disposed between the wide portion and the adjacent individual electrode, the second narrow portion having a width less than the width of the wide portion (see illustration below), wherein the width of the conductive material of the wiring line at the first narrow portion is less than the width of the conductive material of the wiring line at the wide portion (see illustration), wherein three or more individual electrodes are connected in a chain by the plurality of wiring lines (see figs. 3, 6C). PNG media_image1.png 848 688 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claims 16 and 17, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, a liquid discharge head, a flow passage member, pressurizing chambers, discharge holes and a control unit (see fig. 4, Note head with pressure chambers 16, discharge holes 14a, flow passage members 12, control unit 1p). Regarding claim 20, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, wherein each wiring line among the plurality of wiring lines is connected to the one individual electrode of the plurality of individual electrodes at one position (see illustration, Note that this language can mean almost anything. Note that all shown components are connected electrically). Regarding claim 21, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, wherein a minimum width of the first narrow portion differs from a minimum width of the second narrow portion (see illustration). Regarding claim 22, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, see illustration, Note that the first and second narrow portions are located at different distances from the wide portion, making the variation rate different. Regarding claim 23, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, note that the a straight line can be drawn through the wiring line shown. Regarding claim 24, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, note that if the wiring line is defined to contain only a single portion of the parallel wiring lines at the individual electrodes, the limitation is met. Regarding claim 25, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, see illustration. Regarding claim 26, Matsuura teaches the piezoelectric actuator according to claim 10, see fig. 6. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 8/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The claims have been amended to further specify the structure of the device, but the amendments fail to distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. The rejections above have been updated to reflect the changes to the claims. The standing prior art rejection is maintained. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached 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, DOUGLAS X. RODRIGUEZ can be reached at 571-431-0716. 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. /ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 11, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jul 12, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 18, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Dec 17, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Aug 21, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600127
INKJET ASSEMBLY, INKJET PRINTING APPARATUS AND INKJET PRINTING METHOD FOR USE IN PREPARATION OF DISPLAY COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583238
PAPER SUPPLY CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576644
RECORDING DEVICE AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING RECORDING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570101
RECORDING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558904
DROP-ON-DEMAND INK DELIVERY SYSTEMS AND METHODS WITH TANKLESS RECIRCULATION FOR CARD PROCESSING SYSTEMS
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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
42%
Grant Probability
48%
With Interview (+5.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1335 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