Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/182,447

PRINTING CONTROL DEVICE, PRINTING CONTROL METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUMFOR COLOR MATERIAL REPLACEMENT

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Mar 13, 2023
Examiner
WASHINGTON, JAMARES
Art Unit
2681
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Fujifilm Business Innovation Corp.
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
545 granted / 671 resolved
+19.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
703
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
§103
54.4%
+14.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 671 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment Amendments and response received 11/14/2025 have been entered. Claims 1-18 are currently pending in this application. Amendments and response are addressed hereinbelow. Specification In light of the amendment to the specification, the examiner hereby withdraws the previous grounds of objection as the new title of more indicative of the invention as claimed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1, 9, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Richard C. Sonntag et al (US 20210206986 A1). Regarding claim 1, Sonntag et al discloses a printing control device (¶ [10-11]) comprising: a processor (¶ [11]) configured to: in a case where the number of colors of a first color group including one or more colors included in print data is larger than the number of colors of a second color group including one or more colors that are able to be printed by a printing unit and a color material of a color that has not been printed from the first color group is not attached to the printing unit (¶ [10] cannot fulfill printing and ¶ [16]), issue an instruction to replace any color material attached to the printing unit with the color material of the color that has not been printed from the first color group (¶ [79-80]); and after the color material is replaced, cause the printing unit to print the color that has not been printed from the first color group (¶ [84]). Regarding claim 9, Sonntag et al discloses the printing control device according to claim 1, wherein the second color group includes at least basic colors including yellow, magenta, cyan, and black and a special color that is different from the basic colors (¶ [67] wherein CMYK adds at least one additional ink), and wherein the number of special colors included in the first color group is larger than the number of special colors included in the second color group (¶ [68] wherein the CMYK can replace or add up to six ink tanks, indicating two additional inks added; See also ¶ [34] traditional ink set CMYK plus a colorant and ¶ [61] explaining the comparison of gamuts when using one or more additional inks). Regarding claim 17, Sonntag et al discloses a printing control method (see rejection of claim 1) comprising: in a case where the number of colors of a first color group including one or more colors included in print data is larger than the number of colors of a second color group including one or more colors that are able to be printed by a printing unit and a color material of a color that has not been printed from the first color group is not attached to the printing unit, issuing an instruction to replace any color material attached to the printing unit with the color material of the color that has not been printed from the first color group (see rejection of claim 1); and after the color material is replaced, causing the printing unit to print the color that has not been printed from the first color group (see rejection of claim 1). Regarding claim 18, Sonntag et al discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program causing a computer to execute a process for printing control (¶ [10]), the process comprising: in a case where the number of colors of a first color group including one or more colors included in print data is larger than the number of colors of a second color group including one or more colors that are able to be printed by a printing unit and a color material of a color that has not been printed from the first color group is not attached to the printing unit, issuing an instruction to replace any color material attached to the printing unit with the color material of the color that has not been printed from the first color group (see rejection of claim 1); and after the color material is replaced, causing the printing unit to print the color that has not been printed from the first color group (see rejection of claim 1). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/14/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s remarks: Claim 1 recites "the number of colors of a first color group including one or more colors included in print data is larger than the number of colors of a second color group including one or more colors that are able to be printed by a printing unit." Sonntag describes a color gamut with first and second colors of ink. Sonntag ¶ [10]. If a print request cannot be fulfilled with those two colors, a notification is issued. Id. A second ink cartridge includes black or a color not included in a first ink cartridge. Id. ¶ [16]. Thus, Sonntag discloses that black is not the first or second color of ink, or any of the colors of ink in the first cartridge. Sonntag does not disclose that black is the only color in the second ink cartridge, only that black is a color in the second ink cartridge. Sonntag does not disclose how many colorants are in the first and second ink cartridges, let alone that one number of colorants is larger than the other. Therefore, Sonntag does not disclose, or suggest, the above-quoted features of claim 1. Examiner response: Sonntag discloses wherein the printer’s cartridge configuration may include inksets and alternative fluids to produce specific colors not reproducible using the typical CMYK inkset. Several instances of “alternative inksets” are provided throughout the prior art of record. Inksets may be replaced and/or added to create different color spaces. In ¶ [61-62], the prior art indicates the traditional inkset (i.e., CYMK) reproduces colors at all “angular locations of the Lab colorspace, whereas the “alternative inkset” may only reproduce about ninety degrees of the angular locations. An example of an alternative inkset is described as one that eliminates one or more of the traditional inks cyan, magenta and yellow process inks and replaces the eliminated CM and/or Y with red and yellow process inks to add to black ink, which can be used to reproduce intense colors such as royal blue and bright green as desired. This teaching indicates the “traditional inkset” as a “first color group” having a larger number of colors than the “non-traditional inkset”. Further, other examples within the prior art teaches the colorant set of the second group may include the traditional inksets plus an additional ink, as addressed in the rejection of claim 9 above. The first inkset includes the traditional inkset plus a plurality of specialty inks. Eliminating a number of inks within the six-colorant cartridge and replacing two or more inks of the first set with another ink not previously provided would be well within the reasoning ability of one of ordinary skill in the art given the teachings of the prior art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-8 and 10-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 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 JAMARES Q WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1585. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-4:30pm. 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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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. /JAMARES Q WASHINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681 January 15, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 27, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Nov 14, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §102
Apr 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602832
SIGNAL PROCESSING DEVICE, CONTROL CIRCUIT, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND SIGNAL PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602937
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND INTERFACES FOR IDENTIFYING COATING SURFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602741
SYSTEMS AND METHODS REGULATING FILTER STRENGTH FOR TEMPORAL FILTERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603966
IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM CAPABLE OF SUPPRESSING IMAGE DEGRADATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12561779
PREDICTING RAILROAD BALLAST FOULING CONDITIONS BASED ON BALLAST IMAGE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+12.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 671 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