Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/282,513

Work Machine Display Control System, Work Machine Display System, Work Machine, Work Machine Display Control Method, And Work Machine Display Control Program

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 15, 2023
Priority
Mar 30, 2021 — JP 2021-056811 +1 more
Examiner
DUNNE, KENNETH MICHAEL
Art Unit
3669
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Yanmar Holdings Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allowance Rate
231 granted / 299 resolved
+25.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
324
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§103
43.0%
+3.0% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 299 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 regarding amended claim 1, see Arguments/Remarks, filed 04/29/2026, with respect to claim 1 and its dependents have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1 and its dependents in view of Miura (in view of Nakata as previously relied on for claims 2-3 subject matter) has been withdrawn. Neither Miura nor Nakata teaches a display which includes/displays a “maintaining function of maintaining an output of the drive device” and “displays an operating state of the maintaining function…of the drive operation” as recited in amended claim 1. Applicant's arguments filed 04/29/2026, regarding the prior art rejections of claims 16 and 17, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims 16 and 17 were not amended to recite similar subject matter to amended claim 1, they still recite the same language as in the originally examined claimed set. As such the first display screen only requires displaying “drive information related to the drive device”; as such the previous rejections (of Miura reference) still applies. 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) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by anticipated by US 20090243831 A1, “Display Device Of Work Vehicle”, Miura et al. Regarding Claim 16, Miura et al teaches “A work machine display control method used for a work machine including a work unit that performs a work by driving an attachment attached to a machine body of the work machine;”(Abstract: teaches invention is a display control system for a work machine which includes actuators (drive device) for a work device + [0043] work device is/includes an attachment of the machine body);” ; and a drive device that drives the attachment by supplying power to the attachment”([0043]-[0045] actuators are a drive device which provide power to the attachment);” the work machine display control method comprising: causing a display device to display a first display screen including drive information related to the drive device.”( [0008] According to an aspect of the present invention, there is provided a display device for a work vehicle having a work apparatus operated by an actuator, the device comprising a flow rate limit setting unit for variably setting a maximum flow rate level of hydraulic oil supplied to and drained from the actuator by operating an operating member, and a display unit for displaying the maximum flow rate level of the hydraulic oil supplied to and drained from the actuator, wherein the hydraulic oil whose flow rate corresponds to a manipulated variable of the operating member is supplied to and drained from the actuator within a range defined by the maximum flow rate level that is set by the flow rate limit setting unit to cause the work apparatus to operate, and an operating member symbol for indicating the operating member is displayed in the display unit, with the maximum flow rate level of the hydraulic oil supplied to and drained from the actuator by operating the operating member being displayed in accordance with the operating member symbol.” Display includes oil flow rate to actuators (drive information of the drive devices)) Regarding Claim 17, it is a non-transitory computer readable medium equivalent to the method claim 16 above, it has the same grounds of rejection. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 and 4-15 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: No prior art was found to teach or render obvious a work machine display system which includes “maintaining function of maintaining an output of the drive device” and “displays an operating state of the maintaining function…of the drive operation” as recited in amended claim 1. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” 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 KENNETH MICHAEL DUNNE whose telephone number is (571)270-7392. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:30-6:30. 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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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. /KENNETH M DUNNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Apr 29, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 15, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703519
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INCREASING AIRCRAFT SEARCH AND RESCUE MISSION EFFECTIVENESS
4y 2m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12698009
OBJECT DETECTION AND TRACKING FOR AUTOMATED OPERATION OF VEHICLES AND MACHINERY
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12698069
AUTONOMOUS UNDERWATER VEHICLE AND CORRESPONDING GUIDANCE METHOD
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12697884
PULSED ELECTRIC MACHINE CONTROL
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12694739
VEHICLE CONTROL APPARATUS, VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 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
77%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.6%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 299 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