Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/350,275

INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, ROBOT SYSTEM, MANUFACTURING METHOD OF PRODUCT, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 11, 2023
Examiner
DAVIS, JERROD I
Art Unit
3656
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
162 granted / 189 resolved
+33.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
214
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.4%
+9.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 189 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Status of Claims This Office Action is in response to the amendments filed 12/19/2025. Claims 1-19 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/22/2026 has been entered. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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, 3-11, 13-14 and 17 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. For example, the amendment “changing a threshold to be used for the interference confirmation based on program information that defines a type of a movement of the first component or the second component in the simulation by the processor and the memory;” recites the limitation “based on program information that defines a type of a movement”, while [0054] and [0169] of the specification recite: for example, a program defining different movements of the robotic apparatus, and information defining a movement of the second component, no recitation of different types of movements are clearly recited. Per [0067] of the specification of the instant application, of the publication, different thresholds may be set for different movements of these components, however it is still unclear what “type” of movements the first and/or second component may comprise. At best these recitations teach changing the threshold based on program information that defines a movement of a component and does not clearly establish different types of movements. Therefore, this limitation is directed to new matter as it is not clear what type(s) of movement(s) of the components for changing a threshold pertains to. Claims 2-9 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 112(a) by virtue of dependency of claim 1. 10- 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 112(a) with similar rationale as the rejection of claims 1-9 and 13-19. Response to Arguments Regarding claim 1 and similarly with respect to claim 10 Applicant's arguments filed 12/19/2025 have been fully considered however, they are directed to the claims as amended. Applicant’s amendments have necessitated a rejection for new matter under 35 U.S.C 112(a) and because the claims are rejected under 112(a) no prior art rejection is applied. Furthermore, no reasons for allowance are included, because the only difference between the new claims and the claims filed 07/18/2025 are directed to new matter issues. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERROD IRVIN DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7083. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 7:00 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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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. /JERROD IRVIN DAVIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 11, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 18, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Dec 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 18, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594933
Method for Safeguarding a Danger Zone
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589951
ROBOTIC SYSTEMS WITH GRIPPING MECHANISMS, AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589776
DATA-DRIVEN PREDICTION-BASED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRAJECTORY PLANNING OF AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576845
SYSTEM AND METHOD TO PROVIDE TRAILER BACKING ASSISTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12560502
ROBOTIC CELL SYSTEM FOR BALANCING A WHEEL AND TIRE ASSEMBLY
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
86%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+11.8%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 189 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