Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/475,579

LIQUID VISCOSITY MEASUREMENT DEVICE AND LIQUID VISCOSITY MEASUREMENT METHOD

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 27, 2023
Examiner
NIA, FATEMEH ESFANDIARI
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
158 granted / 215 resolved
+5.5% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
265
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
§112
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 215 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election of Group I, Species 1, and Species (a) without traverse in the reply filed on 01/07/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-8 and 12-13 are examined. Remaining claims directed to Group II , and non-elected species are withdrawn1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 6 recites “wherein the channel wall is configured to extend to a range where a pressure wave which occurs along with the generation of the bubble reaches.” And it is not clear what it means. Does it mean range of size and length or width of channel wall or what? what it means by “pressure wave which occurs along with the generation of the bubble reaches”? what is pressure wave which occurs along with the generation of the bubble ? and pressure wave reaches to what? The claim is so unclear that it precludes a reasonable search for prior art. 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. Claims 1 , 3, 4-5, 7-8, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KANO2, JP2007017207A in view of Imanaka, US 20210129041 A1 and Miguet, Jonas, Florence Rouyer, and Emmanuelle Rio. "The life of a surface bubble." Molecules 26.5 (2021): 1317. Claim 1 KANO in e.g., figs. 1-7 teaches: A liquid viscosity measurement device 100 for measuring a viscosity of a liquid (at least Abstract), the liquid viscosity measurement device comprising: a substrate (1); a channel (10,6) configured to be installed on the substrate (1) so that the liquid flows through the channel (10,6); a heating element (electrothermal transducer 2) configured to generate a bubble (8) in the liquid inside the channel (10,6); a deriving unit (fig.5A elements 101 to 107) configured to derive the viscosity of the liquid by specifying a bubble 8 from generation to disappearance of the bubble 8 , so that the viscosity of the liquid is derived based on the bubble 8 (at least Abstract). KANO does not specifically teach: a sensor configured to be placed in a vicinity of the heating element so as to measure a temperature; and a deriving unit configured to derive the viscosity of the liquid by specifying a bubble disappearance time period from generation to disappearance of the bubble based on a change in temperature obtained by use of the sensor, so that the viscosity of the liquid is derived based on the bubble disappearance time period. Regarding limitation 1 In the similar field of endeavor, Imanaka in e.g., figs.16A,16B teaches a sensor 1610 configured to be placed in a vicinity of the heating element 10 so as to measure a temperature. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Imanaka‘s temperature sensor in a vicinity of the heating element for KANO’s viscosity measurement device so as to measure a temperature. One of ordinary skill in the art knows the viscosity is correlated to the temperature and would have been motivated to determine viscosity of fluid knowing the temperature in which viscosity is determined. Regarding limitation 2 In the similar field of endeavor, Miguet teaches to derive the viscosity of the liquid by specifying a bubble disappearance time period from generation to disappearance of the bubble (at least fig.7 ( c ), is plot of bubble lifetime vs viscosity and related citations in section 5. Bubble lifetime and related disclosed theory) , so that the viscosity of the liquid is derived based on the bubble disappearance time period (bubble life time t as cited in the plot of fig.7 c is correlated to a parameter that contains and scales with viscosity characteristics as a key term3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Miguet‘s specifying a bubble disappearance time period from generation to disappearance of the bubble so that the viscosity of the liquid is derived based on the bubble disappearance time period for the modified KANO‘s liquid viscosity measurement device with Imanaka’s temperature sensor and the modified KANO’s deriving unit configured to derive the viscosity of the liquid by specifying a bubble disappearance time period from generation to disappearance of the bubble based on a change in temperature obtained by use of the modified KANO’s sensor, so that the viscosity of the liquid is derived based on the modified KANO’s bubble disappearance time period. One of ordinary skill in the art knows bubbles are present in many industrial processes motivated many theoretical, numerical and experimental works (e.g., Miguel Abstract) would have been motivated to make this modification in order to study entire life of bubble and derive different correlations which correlate bubble paraments to these characteristics to be used in industrial applications (Miguel Abstract and page 2 first paragraph). Furthermore, based on MPEP 2143 (C), courts have ruled that Use of known technique (Miguet’s known correlation between bubble lifetime to fluid properties such as viscosity parameters) to improve similar devices (KANO’s device to measure viscosity) in the same way is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Claim 3 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 1, Miguet teaches wherein the deriving unit is configured to derive the viscosity of the liquid by referring to a table in which a bubble disappearance time period and a viscosity are associated with each other (the bubble lifetime and viscosity related parameter on fig.7 c broadly reads on this limitation and the combination teaches this limitation based on obviousness for the same reason and motivation cited above). Claim 4 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 1, Miguet teaches wherein the deriving unit is configured to calculate the viscosity of the liquid by use of a relational equation which represents a relation between a bubble disappearance time period and a viscosity (the bubble lifetime and viscosity related parameter on fig.7 c broadly reads on this limitation and the combination teaches this limitation based on obviousness for the same reason and motivation cited above). Claim 5 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 1, Imanaka in fig.16B teaches further comprising a channel wall (1620) on a surface facing the heating element 10 so that the channel (with W) is sandwiched between the channel wall 1620 and the heating element 10. Examiner adds that it has been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the - operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. in re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this case, there is absolutely no criticality to the limitations related to the arrangement of heating element and channel wall. Claim 7 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 1, Imanaka further teaches wherein the sensor 1610 is configured to be placed on the substrate. Examiner adds that it has been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the - operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. in re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this case, there is absolutely no criticality to the limitations related to the arrangement of heating element and channel wall and sensor. Claim 8 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 7, Imanaka further teaches wherein, on the substrate, the heating element 10 is configured to be laminated closer to the channel (not labeled but shown with water W and bubble 13) than the sensor 1610 is. Examiner adds that it has been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the - operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. in re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this case, there is absolutely no criticality to the limitations related to the arrangement of heating element and channel wall and sensor. Claim 13 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 5, Imanaka further wherein the sensor 1610 is configured to be placed on the channel wall 1620 for the same reason as cited above. Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KANO, JP2007017207A in view of Imanaka, US 20210129041 A1 and Miguet, Jonas, Florence Rouyer, and Emmanuelle Rio. "The life of a surface bubble." Molecules 26.5 (2021): 1317, and CANON, JP 2682993 B2. Claim 12 KANO combined with Imanaka and Miguet teaches the liquid viscosity measurement device according to claim 1, but the combination does not specifically teach wherein the heating element is configured to generate energy in a range in which the bubble is not generated at a timing before the bubble disappears. CANON in e.g., figs. 1 and 5a,5b teaches wherein the heating element 103 is configured to generate energy in a range (pulses in fig.5) in which the bubble is not generated at a timing before the bubble disappears (lowering temperature to minimum is equivalent with disappearing bubbles and as shown in figs.5 the pulse of energy is generated after disappearance of bubbles in minimum temperature). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use CANON‘s driving unit for the modified KANO‘s driving unit configured to specify the bubble disappearance time period based on a time at which the bubble is generated and a time at which an inflection point occurs in a drop phase which comes after the temperature measured by the sensor rises. One of ordinary skill in the art knows the issues such as insulation film on wall would have been motivated to make this modification in order to manage the heating pulse and timing of bubbles to solve these issue (see the underlined portion on translated copy of CANON provided by the office)4. PNG media_image1.png 350 544 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 284 512 media_image2.png Greyscale Allowable subject matter Claim 2 is 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: Regarding claim 2: The prior art, alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious an assembly comprising a liquid viscosity measurement device for measuring a viscosity of a liquid wherein the deriving unit is configured to specify the bubble disappearance time period based on a time at which the bubble is generated and a time at which an inflection point occurs in a drop phase which comes after the temperature measured by the sensor rises, in conjunction with the remaining claim limitations. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN 109945681 A JP H04231966 A These prior arts teach wherein the deriving unit is configured to specify the bubble disappearance time period based on a time at which the bubble is generated but does not teach and a time at which an inflection point occurs in a drop phase which comes after the temperature measured by the sensor rises. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatemeh E. Nia whose telephone number is (469)295-9187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 4:00 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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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. /FATEMEH ESFANDIARI NIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2855 1 Claims 14-15 are directed to non-elected species 3 shown on fig.9. 2 Prior art of record 3 The parameters on plot fig.7 c are derived from theory where the dominant physics is viscous stresses, in summary lifetime of bubbles is controlled by film drainage which depends on viscosity, and lifetime increases with viscosity 4 FIG. 5 (a) shows the relationship between the electrothermal converter drive pulse and the heater surface temperature when stable and continuous discharge is performed. When the drive pulse rises, the surface temperature of the electrothermal converter starts to rise, and the time when the drive pulse is turned off becomes maximum. After being turned off, the surface temperature drops, and before the next drive pulse is turned on, the surface temperature returns to the initial temperature to prepare for the next foaming.” The bubbles do not disappear and ejection failure occurs. Normally, Q .sub.1 Q .sub.2 + Q .sub.3 + Q .sub.4 is established, but when impurities such as cutting oil are mixed in, a film of impurities is generated on the surface of the electrothermal converter as shown in Fig. 4, and this becomes a heat insulating film. And this balance breaks down. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing this.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591962
METHOD OF EXAMINING A PARTICULATE SUBSTANCE COMPRISING INORGANIC PARTICLES, COMPRISING DETERMINING AT LEAST ONE BINDER QUALITY ASSOCIATED PROPERTY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584874
GAS MEASURING DEVICE AND GAS MEASURING PROCESS FOR A TARGET GAS WITH IMPROVED COMPENSATION OF AN AMBIENT CONDITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578255
DETERMINING A VAPOR PRESSURE OF A FLUID IN A METER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566148
HYDROGEN SULFIDE SENSOR AND ASSOCIATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12560522
APPARATUS FOR MEASURING PROPERTIES OF PARTICLES IN A SOLUTION AND RELATED METHODS
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+22.7%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 215 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