Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/485,098

VOLTAGE-ASSISTED PAINTING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Oct 11, 2023
Examiner
GREENLUND, JOSEPH A
Art Unit
3752
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nissan North America, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
418 granted / 623 resolved
-2.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
679
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.6%
+6.6% vs TC avg
§102
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 623 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 Currently claims 1-20 are pending. 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. Claims 1-20 are 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 1 recites the limitation "paint" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 recites the limitation “an outer surface” in line 6, this is double inclusion as the outer surface has already been claimed in lines 4-5 of claim 1. Claim 8 recites the limitation “an outer surface” of the inner wall in lines 2-3, this is double inclusion as the outer surface of the inner wall is already claimed in claim 1. The term “high” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitation “a high viscosity” has been rendered indefinite by use of the term “high” as it is unclear what constitutes “high viscosity” paint, what level of viscosity is needed to define it as “high.” Claim 10 recites the limitation "paint" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 10 recites the limitation “paint” in line 5, this appears to be double inclusion, as the paint was claimed in line 2. Claim 10 recites the limitation “paint” in line 5, this appears to be double inclusion, as the paint was claimed in line 2. Claim 10 recites the limitation “an outer surface” in line 13, is double inclusion as the outer surface of the inner wall was already claimed in line 11. Claim 17 recites the limitation “an outer surface” in line 2, is double inclusion as the outer surface of the inner wall was already claimed in claim 10. The term “high” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitation “a high viscosity” has been rendered indefinite by use of the term “high” as it is unclear what constitutes “high viscosity” paint, what level of viscosity is needed to define it as “high.” Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of the application (U.S. 2017/0128969) discloses nozzle assembly for a painting system, with an outer wall and an inner wall, paint supplied within the inner wall, a fluid between the inner and outer wall, and the application of electrodes to the system. U.S. 5,992,244, discloses the application of electrodes circumferentially around a surface of a wall, connected to a power source, and charging a fluid therein. The prior art fails to disclose “the pair of electrodes being configured to be electrically connected to a power source, the fluid passage being configured to receive a fluid, upon supplying power to the pair of electrodes, water droplets are separated from the fluid in the fluid passage and pass through the inner wall to coat an inner surface of the inner wall to facilitate movement of the paint through the paint passage.” Specifically the application of using the electrodes to separate water droplets which then pass through the inner wall and coat an inner surface of the inner wall was not found in the prior art. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A GREENLUND whose telephone number is (571)272-0397. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm EST. 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, Arthur Hall can be reached at 571-270-1814. 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. /JOSEPH A GREENLUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 11, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594447
FIRE EXTINGUISHING CONTROL METHOD, FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM, AND FIRE EXTINGUISHING PROTECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589405
ULTRASONIC ATOMIZER WITH ACOUSTIC FOCUSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582853
Fire Zone Thermal Protection for Adjacent Components
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12564146
IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH HEIGHT-ADJUSTING SYSTEM FOR ADJUSTING TOWER HEIGHT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557742
IRRIGATION DEVICE HAVING ROTATABLE SUPPORTS
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
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 623 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