Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/291,920

INKJET RECORDING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 25, 2024
Examiner
MRUK, GEOFFREY S
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Kyocera Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1062 granted / 1152 resolved
+24.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
1170
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
66.7%
+26.7% vs TC avg
§102
14.5%
-25.5% vs TC avg
§112
5.7%
-34.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1152 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Species A, claims 1-4 and 24-25 in the reply filed on 09 February 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 5-16 and 22-23 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. The examiner notes claims 17-21 were canceled by applicant on 25 January 2024. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The references cited in the information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 25 January 2024, 10 November 2024, and 05 January 2026, have been considered. Drawings The drawings received on 25 January 2024 are accepted. Specification The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Examiner’s Note The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-4 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaga et al. (US 2022/0111656). With respect to claim 1, Takenaga discloses an inkjet recording apparatus comprising: at least one head (Fig. 1, element 2A or 2B) configured to eject liquid respectively (paragraph 0019); and a container (Fig. 2, element 7) comprising a container body (Fig. 2, element 20) with an opening (Fig. 3A, element F1 or F2), the opening being configured to receive liquid ejected from the at least one head (paragraph 0036), and a partition (Fig. 4, element 26) configured to partition the container body into a plurality of regions which are independent each other (paragraph 0031), wherein the partition comprises: at least one first portion (Fig. 4, element 26a) configured to partition the container body in a first direction (Fig. 4, Y direction); and at least one second portion (Fig. 4, element 26b) configured to partition the container body in a second direction (Fig. 4, X direction) intersecting the first direction. The examiner notes to applicant that the limitations concerning portions of the partition are broad in scope and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Takenaga as applied above. With respect to claim 2, Takenaga discloses the at least one first portion (Fig. 4, element 26a) comprises a plurality of first portions (Fig. 26, i.e. 26f and other portions in the Y direction). With respect to claim 3, Takenaga discloses the at least one second portion (Fig. 4, element 26b) comprises a plurality of second portions (Fig. 26, i.e. 26c and other portions in the X direction). With respect to claim 4, Takenaga discloses the at least one head (Fig. 1, element 2A or 2B) comprises: an ink head (paragraph 0018, i.e. 2A or 2B) configured to eject ink (paragraph 0018, i.e. pigment ink); and a treatment liquid head (paragraph 0018, i.e. 2A or 2B) configured to eject treatment liquid (paragraph 0018, i.e. dye ink), and wherein the partition (Fig. 4, element 26) is configured to partition the container body into an ink container portion with a first opening (Fig. 4, element 23A), the first opening being configured to receive the ink ejected from the ink head (paragraph 0037) and a treatment liquid container portion with a second opening (Fig. 4, element 23B), the second opening being configured to receive the treatment liquid ejected from the treatment liquid head (paragraph 0037). The examiner notes to applicant that the type of ink and/or liquid ejected by the printheads are not seen to further limit the structure of the claims and are not seen to further distinguish the structure in view of Takenaga. With respect to claim 24, Takenaga discloses the container (Fig. 2, element 7) is a head cap (Fig. 2, element 7a or 7b) configured to individually cap the ink head (Fig. 1, element 2A or 2B) and the treatment liquid head ((Fig. 1, element 2A or 2B; paragraph 0021). With respect to claim 25, Takenaga discloses the container (Fig. 2, element 7) is a flushing container (Fig. 2, element 20) configured to receive the ink and the treatment liquid ejected from the ink head (Fig. 1, element 2A or 2B) and the treatment liquid head (Fig. 1, element 2A or 2B), respectively, at the time of flushing (paragraph 0022). Conclusion In view of the foregoing, the above claims have failed to patentably distinguish over the applied art. The remaining references listed on forms 892 and 1449 have been reviewed by the examiner and are considered to be cumulative to or less material than the prior art references relied upon in the rejection above. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Geoffrey Mruk whose telephone number is (571)272-2810. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30 PM. 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, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached at (571) 272-5960. 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. /GEOFFREY S MRUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 03/04/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 25, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594761
LIQUID EJECTION HEAD AND PRINTING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589595
LIQUID DISCHARGE APPARATUS AND STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589590
Liquid Ejecting Head And Liquid Ejecting Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589604
LIQUID EJECTION HEAD, METHOD OF DETACHING PROTECTION MEMBER FROM LIQUID EJECTION HEAD, AND LIQUID EJECTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589591
LIQUID EJECTING HEAD AND LIQUID EJECTING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+3.0%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1152 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