Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/051,585

TRANSFER APPARATUS, CONTROL DEVICE, TRANSFER METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Nov 01, 2022
Priority
Nov 02, 2021 — JP 2021-179610
Examiner
MACKEY, PATRICK HEWEY
Art Unit
3653
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
754 granted / 902 resolved
+31.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
938
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
27.1%
-12.9% vs TC avg
§102
41.4%
+1.4% vs TC avg
§112
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 902 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The Amendment filed 1/14/2026 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-9, 12-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims have been amended to recite that the suction hand includes “a plurality of suction mechanisms, each of the suction mechanisms including: a first suction unit . . . and a second suction unit . . .each of the suction mechanisms being independently movable in the first direction, each of the second suction units being independently movable in the second direction . . .” (emphasis added). There is no support in the disclosure as filed for this arrangement of claim elements which recite that each mechanism, which includes a first unit and a second unit, is independently movable in the first direction. The examiner notes that the claim amendments may be a transcribing error. The applicant states in the remarks filed 1/14/2026, “the applied art does not teach or render obvious that the transfer apparatus comprises the suction hand in which each of the first suction units is independently movable in the first direction, the transfer apparatus comprises the suction hand in which each of the second suction units is independently movable in the second direction, and one of the plurality of the first suction units and corresponding one of the plurality of second suction units are included in one of the plurality of suction mechanisms.” However, the claims have not been amended in accordance with this statement. Additionally, if the amendments are the result of a transcribing error, an After Final Amendment solely directed towards correcting this inconsistency will be entered and the application may be allowed. For example, a proposed amendment changing “each of the suction mechanisms being independently movable in the first direction” to “each of the first suction units being independently movable in the first direction” would likely be entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PATRICK HEWEY MACKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6916. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9-5. 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, Michael McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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. /PATRICK H MACKEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 14, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611776
Multiple Hydraulic Robot System for Precisely Mounting Girder
3y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12606390
System and Method for Bulk Transfer-Based Container Unloading
3y 7m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12600493
AUTOMATED BAGGAGE HANDLING CARTS AND SYSTEMS
3y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577060
CARD ATTACHMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD
3y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565379
STORAGE SYSTEM
4y 2m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+13.1%)
2y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 902 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