Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/671,117

LIQUID EJECTION APPARATUS CAPABLE OF SUPPRESSING DRYING OF LIQUID AND LIQUID EJECTION METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 22, 2024
Examiner
VALENCIA, ALEJANDRO
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Kyocera Document Solutions Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
42%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
48%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 42% of resolved cases
42%
Career Allow Rate
567 granted / 1335 resolved
-25.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
151 currently pending
Career history
1486
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1335 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claim recites that the second and third partial flow paths extend along the vertical direction, but Figure 4 of the present application appear to show wherein the second and third partial flow paths 84B, 84C are inclined, not vertical. Clarification is required. 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. Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi et al. (6,273,546). Regarding claim 1, Kobayashi teaches an ejection apparatus, comprising: an ejection portion (fig. 1, item 7) which ejects liquid; a liquid reception portion (fig. 2, item 60) which receives the liquid ejected from the ejection portion on a lower side of the ejection portion; a pump (fig. 15, item 14) which is arranged apart from the liquid reception portion in a direction intersecting with a vertical direction and sucks in the liquid discharged to the liquid reception portion (see fig. 15); and a liquid flow path which guides the liquid to be sucked in by the pump from the liquid reception portion to the pump, wherein the liquid flow path includes: a first partial flow path extending obliquely downwardly from the liquid reception portion toward a side of the pump (see illustration); a second partial flow path extending downwardly from an extension end portion of the first partial flow path while being bent (see illustration); and a third partial flow path extending upwardly from an extension end portion of the second partial flow path while being bent (see illustration, Note that all claimed flow paths have at least portions meeting the limitations of the claimed directions. The claims do not require that the flow paths are only linear and do not have bends or that the flow paths each extend in only a single direction). PNG media_image1.png 656 730 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Kobayashi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the second partial flow path extends along the vertical direction, and the third partial flow path extends along the vertical direction (see illustration). Regarding claim 3, Kobayashi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the liquid flow path includes a fourth partial flow path which extends obliquely upwardly from an extension end portion of the third partial flow path while being bent and has an extension end portion connected to the pump (see illustration). Regarding claim 4, Kobayashi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the liquid flow path is formed of a material having flexibility (see fig. 27), and the liquid ejection apparatus comprises a bent portion forming portion which comes into contact with the liquid flow path on a lower side of the liquid flow path and forms a bent portion between the first partial flow path and the second partial flow path (see fig. 27, Note that flexible tube rests on the bent portion forming portion, which otherwise would allow the tube to go slack, thereby affecting the bend between the first and second partial flow paths). Regarding claim 5, Kobayashi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 1, comprising: a purge processing portion which executes purge processing for causing the liquid to be ejected from the ejection portion toward the liquid reception portion; and a stop processing portion which stops the pump that is driven when the purge processing is executed, before the purge processing ends (col. 10, lines 23-27, Note that the end of the purge processing has not been defined. Here, the end of the purge processing is being taken to be some time after the stopping of the pump. Further, note that the pump necessarily stops before the suction in the cap stops because there is still suction in the tube after discontinuation of the pump driving). Regarding claim 6, Kobayashi teaches the liquid ejection method executed in the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 1, comprising: a purge step of executing purge processing for causing the liquid to be ejected from the ejection portion toward the liquid reception portion; and a stop step of stopping the pump that is driven when the purge processing is executed, before the purge processing ends (col. 10, lines 23-27, Note that the end of the purge processing has not been defined. Here, the end of the purge processing is being taken to be some time after the stopping of the pump. Further, note that the pump necessarily stops before the suction in the cap stops because there is still suction in the tube after discontinuation of the pump driving). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. 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. /ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600127
INKJET ASSEMBLY, INKJET PRINTING APPARATUS AND INKJET PRINTING METHOD FOR USE IN PREPARATION OF DISPLAY COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583238
PAPER SUPPLY CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576644
RECORDING DEVICE AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING RECORDING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570101
RECORDING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558904
DROP-ON-DEMAND INK DELIVERY SYSTEMS AND METHODS WITH TANKLESS RECIRCULATION FOR CARD PROCESSING SYSTEMS
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
42%
Grant Probability
48%
With Interview (+5.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1335 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