Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/402,002

ELECTROSTATIC COLLECTING APPARATUS, IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, AND CLEANING APPARATUS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jan 02, 2024
Examiner
SCHMITT, BENJAMIN R
Art Unit
2852
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
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 +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1258
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1218 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 § 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. Claims 1-4, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koyama (U.S. Pub. 2018/0299812). Regarding claim 1, Koyama discloses (Figs. 1-6) an electrostatic collecting apparatus 90 (see par. [0047]) comprising: a collecting rotating member 18a [0047] (i.e. collects paper dust: see pars. [0020]-[0021], [0033], and [0047]-[0048]); an adsorption force generating unit 93 [0048] configured to generate an electrostatic adsorption force between the collecting rotating member 18a and a substance to be collected (i.e. paper dust: [0046]-[0048]); a removing member 91 [0047] that contacts a circumferential surface of the collecting rotating member 18a (as shown in Fig. 6; [0047]) and removes the substance to be collected [0047]-[0048] borne on the collecting rotating member 18a; and a collecting portion 90 [0047] that collects the removed substance to be collected [0047], wherein the collecting rotating member 18a includes, along its circumferential surface, a first region (where the surface is positively charged – from the brush 92 to the unit 91: see Fig. 6 and par. [0048]) and a second region (where the surface is negatively charged – from the unit 91 to the brush 92: see Fig. 6 and par. [0048]) that differ from each other in electrostatic adsorption force (i.e. the positive charge attracts negatively charged paper dust: see pars. [0033] and [0048], whereas the negative charge [0047] would then repel such paper dust), and wherein an adsorption force reducing unit 91 [0047] is provided so that the electrostatic adsorption force in the second region is reduced relative to the electrostatic adsorption force in the first region (i.e. the negative charge [0047] would repel the paper dust, which is a reduction in the attracting/adsorption force that is given by the brush 92: [0048])). Regarding claim 2, Koyama discloses (Figs. 1-6) the first region is a region that does not receive a reducing action of the electrostatic adsorption force by the adsorption force reducing unit 91 (i.e. locations around the roller 18a not near or at the unit 91: see Fig. 6), and the second region is a region that receives the reducing action of the electrostatic adsorption force by the adsorption force reducing unit 91 (i.e. the portion of the roller 18a which is near or at the unit 91: see Fig. 6). Regarding claim 3, Koyama discloses (Figs. 1-6) wherein the adsorption force reducing unit 91 is a first electric charge reducing unit [0047] capable of reducing a first electric charge having a polarity opposite to a charging polarity of the collecting rotating member 18a of the substance to be collected (i.e. triboelectrically charges the paper dust collecting roller 18a to a negative polarity: [0047]; which is opposite of the charging polarity: [0048]). Regarding claim 4, Koyama discloses (Figs. 1-6) wherein the removing member 91 comprises a material having an electric conductivity [0047], and is capable of removing the first electric charge from the substance to be collected by contact with the substance to be collected [0047], and wherein the first electric charge reducing unit 91 is the removing member 91. Regarding claim 15, Koyama discloses (Figs. 1-6) the electrostatic collecting apparatus 90 is used in an image forming apparatus 100 forming an image on recording paper “P” [0020]-[0023], wherein the object to be cleaned is recording paper “P” before formation of the image thereon that is conveyed at the image forming apparatus (as shown in Fig. 1; [0020]-[0023]), and wherein the substance to be collected includes a paper powder generated from the recording paper “P” (see pars. [0020]-[0021] and [0047]-[0048]). Regarding claim 19, Koyama discloses (Figs. 1-6) an image forming apparatus 100 [0019] for forming an image on recording paper “P” [0020]-[0023], comprising the electrostatic collecting apparatus 90 (as shown in Figs. 1 and 6). 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. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koyama (U.S. Pub. 2018/0299812) in view of Seki (U.S. Patent 5,625,442). Regarding claim 5, Koyama is applied as above, but does not disclose the removing member is grounded. Seki discloses (Fig. 1) the removing member 14 is grounded (col. 2, line 65–col. 3, line 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Koyama’s device so that the removing member is grounded, as taught by Seki. Such a modification would prevent the accumulation of negative electric charge on the roller (Seki: col. 2, line 65–col. 3, line 3). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 01-26-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Koyama discloses the collecting rotating member 18a includes, along its circumferential surface, a first region (where the surface is positively charged – from the brush 92 to the unit 91: see Fig. 6 and par. [0048]) and a second region (where the surface is negatively charged – from the unit 91 to the brush 92: see Fig. 6 and par. [0048]) that differ from each other in electrostatic adsorption force (i.e. the positive charge attracts negatively charged paper dust: see pars. [0033] and [0048], whereas the negative charge [0047] would then repel such paper dust), and wherein an adsorption force reducing unit 91 [0047] is provided so that the electrostatic adsorption force in the second region is reduced relative to the electrostatic adsorption force in the first region (i.e. the negative charge [0047] would repel the paper dust, which is a reduction in the attracting/adsorption force that is given by the brush 92: [0048])). 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 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

Jan 02, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 26, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §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 12604506
NON-COVALENT MODIFICATION OF GRAPHENE-BASED CHEMICAL SENSORS
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
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 (+15.6%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1218 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