Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/385,609

HUMIDITY BASED BEHAVIOR ADAPTATION

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 31, 2023
Examiner
SCHMITT, BENJAMIN R
Art Unit
2852
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
1030 granted / 1218 resolved
+16.6% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1258
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1218 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 . 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-3, 7-8, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schantz et al. (U.S. Pub. 2003/0020773) in view of Takahashi (U.S. Patent 7,447,450), and further in view of Nishi (U.S. Patent 9,335,732). Regarding claims 1, 13, and 17, Schantz discloses (Figs. 1-6) an image forming device 20 (see par. [0017]), comprising: a humidity indicator 75 [0032]; a temperature indicator 75 [0042]; a scanner 85 [0030] to optically scan the humidity indicator 75 [0030] and the temperature indicator [0042]; a processor 35 [0019]; and a non-transitory computer readable medium (see pars. [0042] and [0048]) storing computer-executable instructions that when executed by the processor 35 cause the processor 35 to (see pars. [0042] and [0048], etc.): instruct the scanner 85 to initiate an optical scan of the humidity indicator 75 (see pars. [0030]-[0032], [0039]-[0041], etc.) and the temperature indicator [0044]; determine a humidity level and a temperature [0044] based on the scan of the humidity indicator (see pars. [0032], [0035]-[0039]) and the temperature indicator respectively [0044]; and instruct the image forming device 20 to adapt a behavior characteristic of the image forming device responsive of the humidity level (i.e. printing slowed, delay between sheets, dry time, etc.: [0039] – re. claim 17, a plurality of settings) and the temperature [0044]. Schantz does not disclose the humidity indicator and the temperature indicator are located under a scan bezel of the scanner. Takahashi discloses (Figs. 1-3) the humidity indicator B1 (col. 4, lines 13-16) is located under a scan bezel B4 of the scanner (as shown in Fig. 1 – and in combination with Schantz, the temperature indicator would also be located under a scan bezel of the scanner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Schantz’s device so that the humidity indicator and the temperature indicator are located under a scan bezel of the scanner, as taught by Takahashi. Such a modification would be the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(A). Schantz also does not disclose the first scan is prior to performing a print operation of the image forming device; and instruct the scanner to initiate a second optical scan of the humidity indicator and the temperature indicator during a wake-up mode of the image forming device; determine a change in the humidity level and temperature between the first optical scan and the second optical scan; and instruct the image forming device to change the behavior characteristics of the image forming device only responsive to the change in the humidity level and the temperature exceeding a threshold amount. Nishi discloses (Fig. 4) the first scan is prior to performing a print operation of the image forming device (i.e. while in sleep mode: col. 8, lines 10-31; Fig. 4, Acts 1 and 2); and instruct the scanner to initiate a second optical scan (when combined with Schantz) of the humidity indicator and the temperature indicator during a wake-up mode of the image forming device (i.e. Acts 4-6, while the heaters are activated: see Fig. 4 and col. 8, line 37–col. 9, line 21); determine a change in the humidity level and temperature between the first optical scan and the second optical scan (at Act 6: see Fig. 4 and col. 9, lines 1-21); and instruct the image forming device to change the behavior characteristics of the image forming device (i.e. to change the heat supplied to the heaters: see Acts 7 and 9 of Fig. 4 and col. 9, lines 22-43 and lines 57-66); only responsive to the change in the humidity level and the temperature exceeding a threshold amount (i.e. is the temperature above the threshold: col. 9, lines 18-21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Schantz’s device so that the first scan is prior to performing a print operation of the image forming device; and instruct the scanner to initiate a second optical scan of the humidity indicator and the temperature indicator during a wake-up mode of the image forming device; determine a change in the humidity level and temperature between the first optical scan and the second optical scan; and instruct the image forming device to change the behavior characteristics of the image forming device only responsive to the change in the humidity level and the temperature exceeding a threshold amount, as taught by Nishi. Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(D). Regarding claims 13 and 17, The apparatus of Schantz in view of Takahashi and Nishi, as applied above in the rejection of claim 1, would perform the method and meet the limitations of claim 13, and additionally discloses performing a print operation of the image forming device utilizing the setting for the behavior characteristic (see pars. [0039], [0041], and [0050]). (however, the examiner notes that the behavior characteristic is modified when the teachings of Nishi are applied to Schantz so that the behavior characteristic is the activation of the heaters to produce the desired internal environment – this is significant for the indication of allowable subject matter, see below) Regarding claim 2, Schantz discloses (Figs. 1-6) the humidity indicator 75 detects and displays the humidity level responsive to chemically reacting to moisture in an environment [0038]. Regarding claim 3, Schantz discloses (Figs. 1-6) the humidity indicator 75 includes a minimum of two humidity levels (as shown in Figs. 5-6; [0038]-[0040]). Regarding claim 7, Schantz discloses (Figs. 1-6) the processor 35 is to determine the humidity level based on a color interpolation of the humidity indicator 75 [0038]-[0040]. Regarding claim 8, Schantz discloses (Figs. 1-6) a temperature indicator 75 [0042] to detect and display a temperature level [0042]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11 and 14 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. The modification of Schantz with Nishi means that the behavior characteristic is the activation of the heaters, therefore it would not be obvious to apply the first/second scans and changing the behavior characteristic to something other than activation of the heaters (in other words, one would not apply the routine taught in Nishi to the claimed “the behavior characteristic is one of a print media pick speed, a print media feed speed, a frequency of printhead servicing, a print media ejection characteristic, or a combination thereof” in claims 11 and 14). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 13, and 17 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Benjamin Schmitt, whose telephone number is (571) 270-7930. The examiner can normally be reached M-F | 8:30-5:00. 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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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. /BENJAMIN R SCHMITT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 22, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 22, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 27, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601618
CASING FOR LIVESTOCK SENSOR AND LIVESTOCK SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596085
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SIMULTANEOUSLY MEASURING AIR CONTAINED HYDROGEN AND WATER VAPOR CONCENTRATIONS VIA A SINGLE MEMS THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596004
SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING POSITION OF SERVICE PIN WITHIN PINHOLE OF WORK MACHINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588946
CATHETER DISTAL FORCE SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578322
METHODS AND CONSUMER PRODUCTS FOR DETECTING A METABOLITE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.4%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1218 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month