Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/607,122

PRINT ARTIFACT COMPENSATION MECHANISM

Non-Final OA §101§102§112
Filed
Mar 15, 2024
Examiner
DULANEY, BENJAMIN O
Art Unit
2683
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Ricoh Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
349 granted / 565 resolved
At TC average
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
591
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§112
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 565 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §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 . Information Disclosure Statement IDS filed 3/15/24 is acknowledged, the references therein relating to the general background of applicant’s invention. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “System for compensating for a non-functioning pel forming element in a printer”. 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 4, 16 and 20 recite the limitation "the first local group … the second local group" in lines 1 and 3, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter as follows. Claims 17-20 are drawn to functional descriptive material recorded on one or more computer readable media. A computer readable medium can be defined as encompassing statutory medium, but it also encompasses non-statutory subject matter such as a signal or carrier wave. A “signal” embodying functional descriptive material is neither a process nor a product (i.e., a tangible “thing”) and therefore does not fall within one of the four statutory classes of §101. Rather, “signal” is a form of energy, in the absence of any physical structure of tangible material. Paragraph 165 of the publication specifically states that the computer readable medium can be a carrier wave. Because the full scope of the claim encompasses non-statutory subject matter, the claim as a whole is non-statutory. The examiner suggests amending the claim to "a non-transitory computer readable medium encoded having instructions stored thereon …”. Any amendment to the claim should be commensurate with its corresponding disclosure. 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. 1) Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. patent 11,636,296 by Stanich et al. (see MPEP 2153.01(a)). 2) Regarding claim 1, Stanich teaches a system comprising: at least one physical memory device to store compensation logic; and one or more processors coupled with the at least one physical memory (figure 23; processor and memory disclosed) device to execute the compensation logic to: generate first and second sets of inverse transfer functions to compensate for a non-functioning pel forming element (column 11, line 50 – column 12, line 20; inverse transfer functions are generated for specific columns [i.e. multiple sets of ITFs]), wherein each set of inverse transfer functions is generated for a corresponding group of functioning pel forming elements based on ink deposition functions associated with the corresponding group (column 12, lines 29-42; ITFs are generated from various ink deposition functions) and a joint target response (figure 7, item 730; column 10, lines 5-18; “large-scale” deposition data is analogous to a “joint response”); wherein the non-functioning pel forming element is located between functioning pel forming elements of the corresponding groups (column 13, lines 3-17; figure 13; defective nozzle is between two columns for which ITFs are generated); and generate compensated halftones based on the first and second sets of inverse transfer functions (figure 10, item 1030; column 12, lines 29-43; compensate halftones are generated from the ITFs). 3) Regarding claim 2, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the compensated halftones are generated by applying the first and second sets of inverse transfer functions to an uncompensated halftone design to modify halftone thresholds of the uncompensated halftone design (figure 10, item 1030; column 12, lines 29-43; compensate halftones are generated from applying the ITFs to uncompensated halftones). 4) Regarding claim 3, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein generating the first and the second sets of inverse transfer functions comprises generating the first set of inverse transfer functions based on first ink deposition functions and third ink deposition functions and generating the second set of inverse transfer functions based on second ink deposition functions and the third ink deposition functions; wherein the first ink deposition functions correspond to a first local group of pel forming elements including first functioning pel forming elements, the second ink deposition functions correspond to a second local group of pel forming elements including second functioning pel forming elements, and the third ink deposition functions correspond to the joint target response (column 10, lines 5-18; local data [of a particular group/column] is combined with large-scale data [i.e. joint response]). 5) Regarding claim 4, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the functioning pel forming elements in the first local group comprise first functioning pel forming elements adjacent to the non-functioning pel forming element and the pel forming elements in the second local group comprise second functioning pel forming elements adjacent to the first functioning pel forming elements (column 18, lines 16-19; 2 adjacent profiles on each side of a gap are boosted). 6) Regarding claim 5, Stanich teaches the system of claim 3, wherein generating the first, second and third ink deposition functions comprises generating a first Gaussian shaped ink deposition profile associated with the first local group, generating a second Gaussian shaped ink deposition profile associated with the second local group of pel forming elements and generating a third Gaussian shaped ink deposition profile associated with the joint target response (column 10, lines 5-18; local gaussian profile data [of a particular group/column] is combined with large-scale data [i.e. joint response]). 7) Regarding claim 6, Stanich teaches the system of claim 5, wherein generating the first, second and third ink deposition functions further comprises combining the first, second and third Gaussian shaped ink deposition profiles (column 10, lines 5-18; deposition data is combined). 8) Regarding claim 7, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein an ink deposition function further comprises a function of a pel forming element position and input digital count (column 20, lines 5-6; ink deposition function represents particular nozzle element and digital count). 9) Regarding claim 8, Stanich teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the compensation logic applies the first and second sets of inverse transfer functions to generate fourth ink deposition functions, verifies whether a difference between the fourth ink deposition functions and large-scale ink deposition functions is within a predetermined threshold and validates an acceptable compensation upon determining that the difference is within the predetermined threshold (column 13, lines 54-65; compensation ink deposition function is validated). 10) Regarding claim 9, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising a print engine comprising a plurality of pel forming elements (column 21, lines 2-3; plurality of elements). 11) Regarding claim 10, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein inverse transfer functions transform output digital counts, and the ink deposition functions represent output ink amount versus input digital count (column 20, lines 5-7; ITFs represent output ink vs input count). 12) Regarding claim 11, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein each corresponding group has no functioning pel forming element in common (column 11, lines 58-60; ITF groupings apply to a particular column). 13) Regarding claim 12, Stanich teaches the system of claim 1, wherein each set of inverse transfer functions is generated based on weighted contributions to the joint target response (column 8, line 51 – column 9, line 29; location of defective nozzle necessarily weights particular nozzle columns [and their corresponding ITFs] based on the large scale ink deposition formulas). 14) Claims 13-16 are taught in the same manner as described in the rejections of claims 1-4 above, respectively. 15) Claims 17-20 are taught in the same manner as described in the rejections of claims 1-4 above, respectively. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN O DULANEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2874. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6. 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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached at (571)270-5254. 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 O. DULANEY Primary Examiner Art Unit 2676 /BENJAMIN O DULANEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 15, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597136
APPARATUS AND METHOD OF RECORDING A STORAGE LOCATION BY SIZE FOR HARVESTED TUBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592998
NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM HAVING CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS, INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, AND CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590841
Thermal Imaging for Self-Driving Cars
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588874
OPTIMIZING CHECKPOINT LOCATIONS ALONG AN INSERTION TRAJECTORY OF A MEDICAL INSTRUMENT USING DATA ANALYSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586185
BLOOD FLOW EXTRACTION IMAGE FORMING DEVICE, METHOD OF FORMING BLOOD FLOW EXTRACTION IMAGE, AND BLOOD FLOW EXTRACTION IMAGE FORMING PROGRAM
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
62%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+11.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 565 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