Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/070,507

RESIN PARTICLE, TONER, TONER ACCOMMODATING UNIT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 29, 2022
Priority
Dec 09, 2021 — JP 2021-200285
Examiner
KUIPERS, JENNA ANN
Art Unit
1734
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ricoh Company Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
19 granted / 25 resolved
+11.0% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
68
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
86.5%
+46.5% vs TC avg
§102
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
§112
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 25 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see the Response, filed 2/10/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-4 and 6-9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-4 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda (WIPO Publication No. 2019-107087) in view of Sacripante (US Patent 9,971,265). Maeda teaches a resin particle comprising a polyester resin (a) with a glass transition temperature of -20°C to 57°C, wherein the resin (a) is crosslinked (Abstract). The exemplary polyester resin (a-4) has a glass transition temperature of -20°C ([0140]). The polyester resin (a) is a non-linear polyester resin ([0041]). The content of the THF-insoluble portion, derived from polyester resin (a), of the resin particle is preferably from 9% to 40% ([0057]). The exemplary resin particles 1-3, 5-6, and 8-15 have THF-insoluble portions between 18% and 40% (Table 2). The resin particles are aggregated with a flocculant such as metal salts, including divalent magnesium chloride, divalent calcium chloride, and trivalent aluminum chloride ([0110]). Aggregation with one of these metal ions will cross-link the polyester resin (a). None of the exemplary polyester resin (a) contain a compound such as an isocyanate that would produce a urethane or urea group in the resin. Maeda teaches a toner containing the resin particles ([0121]). The toner is used for developing electrostatic images in electrophotography ([0132]). It is known in the art that in an electrophotographic image forming apparatus the toner is contained in a toner accommodating unit comprising a container containing the toner. Maeda is silent regarding a carbon-14 concentration in the resin particle. However, Sacripante teaches a toner containing a bio-based amorphous polyester resin (Abstract). The amorphous resin may contain bio-based succinic acid (Col. 8 line 21-25, claim 14). The bio-based content of the toner is about 20% to about 25% (Col. 8 line 29-32). The carbon-14 concentration can be determined from the degree of biomass: Carbon-14 concentration (pMC) = degree of biomass (percent)/0.935 (instant specification Pg 4 line 5-6). The carbon-14 concentration of Sacripante would therefore be 21.4 pMC to 26.7 pMC. Bio-based resins help to reduce environmental issues (Col. 1 line 10-21). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the toner of Maeda to have included a bio-based amorphous resin in order to lessen the environmental impacts of the toner. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jenna Kuipers whose telephone number is (571)272-0161. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:30 PT. 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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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. /J.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1734 /PETER L VAJDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 03/26/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 2 earlier events
Aug 20, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Feb 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
May 13, 2026
Interview Requested
May 19, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
May 19, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12631982
TONER
3y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12585208
GLITTERING TONER, TONER-STORING UNIT, DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER-STORING UNIT,IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, AND IMAGE FORMING METHOD
3y 3m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578666
TONER AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING TONER
3y 4m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12535749
ELECTROSTATIC CHARGE IMAGE DEVELOPING TONER, ELECTROSTATIC CHARGE IMAGE DEVELOPER, TONER CARTRIDGE, PROCESS CARTRIDGE, IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, AND IMAGE FORMING METHOD
3y 9m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12535750
TONER
3y 7m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+26.1%)
3y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 25 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