Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/602,083

LIQUID DISCHARGE MODULE, LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD, AND LIQUID DISCHARGE APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 12, 2024
Examiner
UHLENHAKE, JASON S
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Ricoh Company Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
1010 granted / 1160 resolved
+19.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -3% lift
Without
With
+-2.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1201
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§112
6.7%
-33.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1160 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-11, 13-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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) 1, 3, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz et al (U.S. Pub. 2019/0336990) in view of Suga et al (U.S. Pat. 4,628,330) Regarding claim 1, a liquid discharge module comprising: a nozzle plate (1) including a first face (Figure 1); a second face opposite to the first face (Figure 1) A nozzle hole (2) through which a liquid is discharged from the second face, the nozzle hole including at least two different inner diameters between the first face and the second face (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0061-0062, 0073-0074) A housing including a liquid chamber (the housing surrounds the liquid chamber 3) Facing the first face of the nozzle plate; and communicating with the nozzle hole (Figure 1; Abstract; Paragraphs 0062-0063) The housing supporting the nozzle plate (Figure 1) A valve (8, 10, 11) in the liquid chamber, the valve to contact the first face of the nozzle plate to form a sealed portion between the valve and the nozzle plate to close the nozzle hole (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0064-0065, 0074-0076) wherein the valve includes: an elastic seal to elastically contact the first face of the nozzle plate to form the sealed portion; and a needle (9) supporting the elastic seal at a leading end of the needle adjacent to the nozzle hole (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0063-0074) A mover (9) to move the valve in a contact separation direction between: a contact position at which the valve contacts the nozzle plate; and a separation position at which the valve is separated from the nozzle plate (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0063-0074) Suga discloses a valve and sealing structure wherein the sealing structure (123, 124) will form a closed state and control flow resistance for the ink passage (116) wherein the seal structure includes a recess facing the nozzle plate (Figure 7(a); Column 6, Line 57 – Column 7, Line 19) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Suga into the device of Fritz, for the purpose of recording at a high recording sped with a simplified construction (Column 2, Lines 38-41) Regarding claim 3, Suga discloses a valve and sealing structure wherein the sealing structure (123, 124) will form a closed state and control flow resistance for the ink passage (116) wherein the sealed portion is outside a largest inner diameter of the nozzle hole (Figure 7a; Column 6, Line 57 – Column 7, Line 19) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Suga into the device of Fritz, for the purpose of recording at a high recording sped with a simplified construction (Column 2, Lines 38-41) Regarding claim 17, Suga discloses a valve and sealing structure wherein the sealing structure (123, 124) will form a closed state and control flow resistance for the ink passage (116) wherein the recess includes a tapered shape (Figure 7(a); Column 6, Line 57 – Column 7, Line 19) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Suga into the device of Fritz, for the purpose of recording at a high recording sped with a simplified construction (Column 2, Lines 38-41) Regarding claim 18, Suga discloses the mover comprises a piezoelectric element (Figures 9a, 9b; Column 3, Lines 32-67; Column 7, Line 41- Column 8, Line 5) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Suga into the device of Fritz, for the purpose of recording at a high recording sped with a simplified construction (Column 2, Lines 38-41) Regarding claim 19, wherein the first inner wall and the second inner wall meet at an obtuse angle (Figure 2) Claim(s) 4-8, 13, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz et al (U.S. Pub. 2019/0336990) as modified by Suga et al (U.S. Pat. 4,628,330) and further in view of Chen et al (U.S. Pub. 2006/0028508) Regarding claim 4, Fritz discloses wherein the nozzle hole has: a first inner wall having: a first inner diameter A first length in the contact separation direction; and a second inner wall (angled wall) having: a second inner diameter larger than the first inner diameter (Figure 2 discloses a nozzle consisting of a plurality of sections of different diameter and length) Fritz does not expressly disclose a second length longer than the first length in the contact separation direction; however, Chen discloses a nozzle outlet wherein a second length longer than the first length in the contact separation direction (Figure 2B; Paragraph 0022) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Chen into the device Fritz as modified by Suga, for the purpose of implementing ejection operations through the nozzle Regarding claim 5, wherein the first inner wall extends in a direction parallel to the contact separation direction; and the second inner wall is inclined toward the first inner wall at a predetermined angle and connected to the first inner wall (Figure 2 discloses a nozzle consisting of a plurality of sections of different diameter and length) Regarding claim 6, wherein the first inner wall is closer to the second face than the second inner wall; and the second inner diameter increases toward the first face (Figure 2 discloses a nozzle consisting of a plurality of sections of different diameter and length) Regarding claim 7, wherein the first inner wall and the second inner wall extend in a direction parallel to the contact separation direction (Figure 2) Regarding claim 8, wherein the second inner wall is closer to the first face than the first inner wall (Figure 2) Regarding claim 13, Fritz discloses the sealed portion on the first face is disposed away from the nozzle hole on the second face (Figure 2) Fritz discloses the claimed invention except for the sealed portion on the first face is disposed away from the nozzle hole on the second face for a predetermined distance equal to a sum of the first length of the first inner wall and the second length of the second inner wall. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the sealed portion on the first face is disposed away from the nozzle hole on the second face for a predetermined distance equal to a sum of the first length of the first inner wall and the second length of the second inner wall, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of having the sealed portion on the first face is disposed away from the nozzle hole on the second face for a predetermined distance equal to a sum of the first length of the first inner wall and the second length of the second inner wall, for the purpose forming a space for the sealing member to be properly positioned with the nozzle plate Regarding claim 20, Chen discloses the second length is longer than the first length (Figure 2B; Paragraph 0022) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Chen into the device Fritz as modified by Suga, for the purpose of implementing ejection operations through the nozzle Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz et al (U.S. Pub. 2019/0336990) as modified by Suga et al (U.S. Pat. 4,628,330) and Chen et al (U.S. Pub. 2006/0028508) and further in view of Takahashi et al (U.S. Pat. 5,451,993) Regarding claim 9, Fritz as modified by Suga and Chen does not expressly disclose the second inner wall is closer to the second face than the first inner wall; and the second dinner diameter decreases toward the first face. Takahashi discloses it is known in the art to use a nozzle structure where the second inner wall is closer to the second face than the first inner wall; and the second inner diameter decreases toward the first face (Figure 5 discloses a nozzle exit wherein the second inner diameter is larger near the exit; Column 4, Lines 19-31) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the angled walls as taught by Fritz with the teaching of the second inner wall closer to the second face as taught by Takahashi, for the purpose of enabling the ink droplets to be ejected in a correct direction by suppressing the fluctuation of their flowing direction Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz et al (U.S. Pub. 2019/0336990) as modified by Suga et al (U.S. Pat. 4,628,330) and Chen et al (U.S. Pub. 2006/0028508) and further in view of Wallsten et al (U.S. Pub. 2014/0354739) Regarding claim 10, Wallsten discloses the nozzle plate (12) comprising two components (14, 16) having inner walls (Figure 1; Paragraph 0034) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of nozzle plate assembly as taught by Wallsten into the device of Fritz as modified by Suga and Chen, for the purpose of increasing the ejection amount during an operation Regarding claim 11, Wallsten discloses wherein the first component (14) and the second component (16) are joined to each other to form a single unit (12) (Figure 1; Paragraph 0034) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of nozzle plate assembly as taught by Wallsten into the device of Fritz as modified by Suga and Chen, for the purpose of increasing the ejection amount during an operation Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritz et al (U.S. Pub. 2019/0336990) as modified by Suga et al (U.S. Pat. 4,628,330) and further in view of Wallsten et al (U.S. Pub. 20014/0354739) Regarding claim 14, Wallsten discloses wherein the housing has a side wall (12) defining the liquid chamber (18); and an end face (16) joined to the first face of the nozzle plate around the liquid chamber, the side wall has a projection adjacent to the end face of the housing; and the projection projects towards an interior of the liquid chamber (Figure 1; Paragraph 0034) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Wallsten into the device of Fritz as modified by Suga, for the purpose of increasing the ejection amount during an operation Regarding claim 15, Fritz discloses the liquid discharge module according to claim 1; however, Fritz does not expressly disclose multiple liquid discharge modules. Wallsten discloses multiple liquid discharge modules (Figures 1-2; Paragraphs 0031-0037) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Wallsten into the device of Fritz as modified by Suga, for the purpose of increasing the ejection amount during an operation Regarding claim 16, Wallsten discloses a head holder holding the liquid discharge head to move the liquid discharge head (Figure 1; Paragraph 0031) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Wallsten into the device of Fritz as modified by Suga, for the purpose of increasing the ejection amount during an operation Allowable Subject Matter Claims 21-22 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. 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 JASON S UHLENHAKE whose telephone number is (571)272-5916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Douglas X. Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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. /JASON S UHLENHAKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 March 13, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 12, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 12, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 12, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 31, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600129
DISCHARGE UNIT, LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF DISCHARGE UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600140
INKJET PRINTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600130
EJECTION HEAD NOZZLE FLOODING CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600150
RECORDING DEVICE, SERVICE LIFE ESTIMATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600125
LIQUID EJECTION APPARATUS AND LIQUID EJECTION CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 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
87%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (-2.6%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1160 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