Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/629,714

IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, AND RECORDING MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Apr 08, 2024
Priority
Feb 18, 2014 — JP 2014-028393 +4 more
Examiner
ZONG, HELEN
Art Unit
2683
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
566 granted / 715 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
746
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
91.8%
+51.8% vs TC avg
§102
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§112
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 715 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . DETAILED ACTION Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-26 of U.S. Patent No. 11,979,533 (hereinafter “PAT533”). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, the invention as claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the PAT533 and they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 1 of the Instant Application is anticipated by PAT533 claim 1 in that claim 1 of the Pat533 contains all the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application. Claim 1 of the instant application therefore is not patently distinct from the earlier patent claim and as such is unpatentable for obvious-type double patenting. Regarding dependent claims 2-27 of the present application, they contain the same claim language as the PAT533 claims 2-27, respectively. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN Q ZONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1600. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6. 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, Sarpong Akwasi M. can be reached on (571) 270-3438. 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. HELEN ZONG Primary Examiner Art Unit 2683 /HELEN ZONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 08, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12641184
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS CAPABLE OF USING INFORMATION ON CUT LINE WHICH IS PRINTING ITEM THAT CANNOT BE SET BY PRINTER DRIVER AND IS PRINTED ON RECORDING MEDIUM, PRINTING SETTING APPLICATION, CONTROL METHOD FOR INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12633159
Systems And Methods For Controlling Enrollment Status Of A Trusted User Based On Time
3y 4m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12625653
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD FOR INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
1y 11m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12619386
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD
3y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12611096
MINIMALISTIC INTRAORAL SCANNING SYSTEM
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+8.2%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 715 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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