Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/659,360

INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
May 09, 2024
Examiner
WASHINGTON, JAMARES
Art Unit
2681
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
545 granted / 671 resolved
+19.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
703
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
§103
54.4%
+14.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 671 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/09/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use generic placeholders that are coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholders are not preceded by structural modifiers. Such claim limitations are: accepting unit and management unit in claims 10 and 11. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The specification, at ¶ [37] indicates the accepting unit is a physical input unit which accepts a user’s operation instruction. The management unit, as described in ¶ [49], is described as a physical database (paper DB) for registering paper information. If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yohei Kiuchi et al (US 20140285846 A1). Regarding claim 1, Kiuchi et al discloses an information processing apparatus (¶ [50]) comprising: one or more memories storing instructions (¶ [127]); and one or more processors executing the instructions (¶ [127]) to: accept an editing operation to edit registered paper information (¶ [74]); and not display a screen to accept change of a name of paper in a case where a type of the paper in the paper information on which the editing operation is performed is base paper, and the name of the paper in the paper information has been changed by the editing operation (¶ [93-94] wherein attribute values which have not yet been designated may be edited, indicating in the case where a paper name has been designated, an edit or change screen is not displayed for registering the new name; see also Fig. 26 wherein “edit” is shown over registered paper that have been previously edited to thereby skip selection of that paper again for editing; ¶ [73-74] provisionally registered paper reading on base paper editable by the user, having default attributes initially set by manufacturer), and display the screen in a case where the type of the paper on which the editing operation is performed is the base paper, and the name of the paper has not been changed by the editing operation (¶ [118] and Fig. 24 wherein the name of the paper may be edited). Regarding claim 2, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the screen is displayed based on receiving of an instruction to change the name of the paper from a user (¶ [118] operator presses edit button to change name). Regarding claim 3, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein in a case where the type of the paper on which the editing operation is performed is the base paper, the paper information in which the type of the paper, on which the editing operation is completed, is set to user setting paper is registered as new paper information (¶ [11] attribute changes accepted provides newly registered paper information; ¶ [123] newly registered paper information may be transmitted to a plurality of image forming apparatuses). Regarding claim 4, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3), wherein in a case where the name of the paper is not changed on the displayed screen, the registered new paper information is deleted (¶ [91] wherein attributes match previously registered name, the system does not overwrite the previously stored information with new registration). Regarding claim 5, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3), wherein in a case where the name of the paper is changed on the displayed screen, the name of the new paper information is overwritten by a name after the change (¶ [88] updating of the paper information reads on “overwriting” the previous information). Regarding claim 6, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the paper information includes a setting value including the name of the paper, the type of the paper, and characteristics of the paper, and the editing operation includes an operation to change the setting value (¶ [52]; see also Fig. 13). Regarding claim 7, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the setting value of the paper information in which the type of the paper is the base paper is managed as a value that cannot be changed (¶ [52] wherein paper attributes may be changed while the paper type is represented by a paper ID unique to each paper type; Fig. 6). Regarding claim 8, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the paper information can be set in a case where printing is performed (¶ [73]). Regarding claim 9, Kiuchi et al discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the information processing apparatus is a printing apparatus (see rejection of claim 1). Regarding claim 11, Kiuchi et al discloses a method of controlling an information processing apparatus (see rejection of claim 1) comprising: accepting an editing operation to edit paper information registered with a management unit (see rejection of claim 1); and not displaying a screen to accept change of a name of paper in a case where a type of the paper in the paper information on which the editing operation is performed is base paper, and the name of the paper in the paper information has been changed by the editing operation, and displaying the screen in a case where the type of the paper on which the editing operation is performed is the base paper, and the name of the paper has not been changed by the editing operation (see rejection of claim 1). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 10 is 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMARES Q WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1585. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-4:30pm. 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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (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. /JAMARES Q WASHINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681 March 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 09, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602832
SIGNAL PROCESSING DEVICE, CONTROL CIRCUIT, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND SIGNAL PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602937
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND INTERFACES FOR IDENTIFYING COATING SURFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602741
SYSTEMS AND METHODS REGULATING FILTER STRENGTH FOR TEMPORAL FILTERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603966
IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM CAPABLE OF SUPPRESSING IMAGE DEGRADATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12561779
PREDICTING RAILROAD BALLAST FOULING CONDITIONS BASED ON BALLAST IMAGE
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
81%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+12.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 671 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