Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/517,423

DETECTION DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 22, 2023
Examiner
KIRKLAND III, FREDDIE
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Japan Display INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
958 granted / 1132 resolved
+16.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.0%
-36.0% vs TC avg
§103
34.1%
-5.9% vs TC avg
§102
40.5%
+0.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1132 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
FIRST NON-FINAL REJECTION 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 Objections Claim 2 recites the limitation "a calculated position of the second strain sensor" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 recites the limitation "an actual position of the second strain sensor" in line 4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nebuya et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0298218. With respect to claims 1 and 4, Nebuya teaches a sensor substrate (measurement belt 10, figures 18 and 19) including a plurality of strain sensors arranged on a rectangular flexible substrate at fixed intervals in a longitudinal direction of the flexible substrate (the measurement belt 10 is configured to have electrode pads 12A to 12H and strain gauges 13A to 13H arranged at intervals on a flexible substrate 14, paragraph 217, figures 18-20), wherein a curvature radius between a pair of adjacent strain sensors among the plurality of strain sensors is calculated on a basis of a value from a preceding strain sensor of the pair of adjacent sensors (interpreted as the contour estimation unit 202 that reads a coordinate position of a predetermined reference point indicating a position of a strain gauge designated for every predetermined interval at a distance of one or more strain gauges in a periodic arrangement on the measurement belt 10, paragraph 219), when a start point node is defined as a position of a first strain sensor at one end of the plurality of strain sensors, a relative position of each of the plurality of strain sensors is determined by sequentially adding the relative positions, starting with the first strain sensor of the start point node on a basis of the curvature radius between adjacent strain sensors (interpreted as the contour estimation unit 202 reading a predetermined reference point position of each strain gauge and designating a position of each strain gauge at the predetermined intervals, paragraph 219), when the first strain sensor of the start point node overlaps with a second strain sensor at an nth node (figure 19), a position of the first strain sensor and a position of the second strain sensor are considered to be identical on a relative space (interpreted as the measurement unit 203 specifying an overlap position, paragraph 213, figure 19), and a position of each strain sensor is corrected on a basis of a difference between a calculated position of the second strain sensor determined by sequentially adding the relative positions and an actual position of the second strain sensor (interpreted as contour estimation unit 202 that specifies relative coordinate values of a coordinate position of a subordinate point indicating a position of any strain gauge arranged between the strain gauges indicated by the reference point for a coordinate position of the reference point, and the relative coordinate values are calculated on the basis of the curvature data acquired via the strain gauge, paragraph 220). Further, Nebuya teaches when a predetermined position, on the flexible substrate, of the first strain sensor of the start point node overlaps with a first position on the flexible substrate between a second strain sensor at an nth node and a third strain sensor at an n+1th node (figure 19), a position of the first strain sensor and the first position are considered to be identical on a relative space (interpreted as the measurement unit 203 specifying an overlap position, paragraph 213, figure 19), and a position of each strain sensor is corrected on a basis of a difference between a calculated position of the first position determined by sequentially adding the relative positions and an actual position of the first position (interpreted as contour estimation unit 202 that specifies relative coordinate values of a coordinate position of a subordinate point indicating a position of any strain gauge arranged between the strain gauges indicated by the reference point for a coordinate position of the reference point, and the relative coordinate values are calculated on the basis of the curvature data acquired via the strain gauge, paragraph 220). With respect to claims 2 and 5, Nebuya teaches wherein correction is performed by dividing a value of a difference between a calculated position of the second strain sensor and an actual position of the second strain sensor by the number of arcs between the first strain sensor and the second strain sensor, and subtracting, from each node, a value resulting from the division (interpreted as the contour estimation unit 202 calculating a curvature radius of R2 for each strain gauge point from known positions Ra,Rb and known arc lengths, paragraphs 135-136). Further, Nebuya teaches wherein correction is performed by dividing a value of a difference between a calculated position of the first position and an actual position of the first position by the number of arcs between the first strain sensor and the second strain sensor, subtracting, from each node, a value resulting from the division, and calculating the position of the second strain sensor (also interpreted as the contour estimation unit 202 calculating a curvature radius of R2 of each strain gauge point from known positions Ra,Rb and known arc lengths, paragraphs 135-136). With respect to claim 7, Nebuya teaches wherein the first position is determined by detecting a capacitance between the first strain sensor and each strain sensor (paragraphs 210-211). With respect to claim 8, Nebuya teaches wherein when the capacitance between the first strain sensor and each strain sensor is detected, such detection is performed with use of a mutual capacitance method in which the first strain sensor is driven to detect an electric signal from each strain sensor (interpreted as the measurement unit 203, current source I, and voltmeter V that are connected to the measurement belt10 and the strain sensors, and signals are detected from each strain sensor, paragraphs 111-112 and 209). With respect to claim 9, Nebuya teaches wherein the first position is determined by detecting a capacitance between a plurality of capacitance detection electrodes each disposed between the first strain sensor and a corresponding strain sensor (interpreted as the perimeter measurement unit 203 pre-recognizes intervals α of the perimeter measurement electrode pads and strain gauges 301 to 30f that are periodically pre-arranged on the measurement belt 10, and the perimeter measurement unit 203 measures electrical impedance for every electrode pair in the perimeter measurement electrode pads 301 to 30f, paragraphs 206, 210, figure 18). With respect to claim 10, Nebuya teaches wherein a capacitance between the first strain sensor and each capacitance detection electrode is detected using a mutual capacitance method in which the first strain sensor is driven to detect an electric signal from each capacitance detection electrode (interpreted as the measurement unit 203, current source I, and voltmeter V that are connected to the measurement belt 10 and the strain sensors, and signals are detected from each strain sensor, paragraphs 111-112, 209). With respect to claim 11, Nebuya teaches wherein the plurality of strain gauges are disposed on both surfaces of the flexible substrate (interpreted as the surfaces the strain gauges are disposed on, figures 18-19). With respect to claim 12, Nebuya teaches wherein capacitance values of the strain gauges disposed on both surfaces of the flexible substrate are detected by self capacitance detection (interpreted as the perimeter measurement unit 203 measures an impedance of each electrode pair, paragraph 210), and the first strain sensor on a surface with a small capacitance value and the second strain sensor on a surface with a large capacitance value are detected (the values that are detected as being “small” and “large” as the terms are relative, paragraph 210). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. 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. Claim(s) 3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nebuya et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0298218 in view of Dietz U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0378741. With respect to claims 3 and 6, Nebuya teaches the claimed invention except wherein the flexible substrate has a scale for alignment between the first strain sensor and the second strain sensor. Dietz teaches a multibend sensor having markings on the flexible strip (paragraph 134). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the measurement belt of Nebuya with the markings on the flexible strip as taught by Dietz in order to help maintain alignment (paragraph 134). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDDIE KIRKLAND III whose telephone number is (571)272-2232. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm. 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, John Breene can be reached at (571) 272-4107. 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. FREDDIE KIRKLAND III Primary Examiner Art Unit 2855 /Freddie Kirkland III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 12/31/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 22, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 23, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 23, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594549
PLUNGER ROD AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SUCH A PLUNGER ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590868
ADJUSTABLE TEST OBJECT HOLDER FOR A DRIVE TRAIN, TEST BENCH, AND DRIVE TRAIN TEST BENCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584836
INSTRUMENTED PENDULUM FOR MINIATURIZED CHARPY IMPACT TEST AND CHARPY IMPACT MACHINE COMPRISING THE INSTRUMENTED PENDULUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583129
TORQUE SENSOR AND ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584592
A system for checking the functionality of a pressure relief valve
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1132 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