Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/683,303

MOBILE OBJECT AND ROBOT APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 13, 2024
Priority
Sep 10, 2021 — JP 2021-147384 +1 more
Examiner
ARCE, MARLON ALEXANDER
Art Unit
3611
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Sony Group Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allowance Rate
1086 granted / 1270 resolved
+33.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1279
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
41.1%
+1.1% vs TC avg
§102
37.1%
-2.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1270 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
CTNF 18/683,303 CTNF 81375 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-18 are 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. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 1 recites the limitation " both sides " in line 6, the claim hasn’t mentioned a first side, however then it introduces both sides improperly . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 18 recites the limitation " the first direction of the main body portion" in lines 6-7, the claim introduces “a first direction ” in line 4, however, it is silent about the first direction being part of the main body portion . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-8,10, and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamikawa (JP 2021065994A) . Regarding claim 1, Kamikawa discloses a mobile object comprising: a main body portion (150); a plurality of legs (110,120,130,140) connected to the main body portion via joints (114,124,134,144) rotatable about an axis extending in a first direction that is parallel to a traveling surface (see figures 5 and 6); and an exterior portion (600, see figure 6) that covers both sides in the first direction of the main body portion and an upper side of the main body portion opposite to a side near the traveling surface to enclose the main body portion and the plurality of legs (see figure 6). Regarding claim 2, wherein the exterior portion has a shape in which both sides in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in a plane parallel to the traveling surface are opened (see figure 11). Regarding claim 3, wherein the exterior portion is connected to an upper surface of the main body portion at a plurality of connecting regions (1601-1603, 1611-1614) separated from each other in the first direction and at a plurality of connecting regions (see figures 16 and 17) separated from each other in the second direction. Regarding claim 4, wherein the exterior portion is connected to both side surfaces in the first direction of the main body portion at respective connecting regions (1601-1603, 1611-1614) provided at a central portion in the second direction (see figures 16 and 19). Regarding claim 5, wherein the main body portion has a shape in which the central portion in the second direction protrudes to each of both sides in the first direction --{{so as to say that the main portion extends from the center of the mobile object, which is between points 1612 and 1613 in figure 19 and, goes to the front, rear and both sides, see figure 16 and 19}}--. Regarding claim 6, wherein at least two or more connecting portions (see portions/area around the connecting regions 1601,1602,1603 in figure 18) are provided at each of the connecting regions (see figure 18). Regarding claim 7, wherein a rib portion (see front lip portion of the exterior potion in figure 11) (applicants specification calls the front lip of the exterior portion a rib 151, see figure 16 in the current application) is provided on an upper portion of the opening in the second direction of the exterior portion to partially shield the opening (see figure 11 in Kamikawa). Regarding claim 8, wherein the plurality of legs (110,120,130,140) includes a plurality of links (111,112,121,122,131,132,141,142) that is linearly movable or rotatable with respect to each other. Regarding claim 10, wherein each of the plurality of legs is provided with a projecting portion projecting (113,123,133,143) toward a central portion in the second direction of the main body portion (see figure 5). Regarding claim 15, wherein a display unit (see Par. 0010 in the attached translation, where it states “A display capable of displaying advertising information may also be attached to the surface of the outer casing” ) is provided on an outer side of a side surface in the first direction of the exterior portion. Regarding claim 16, wherein a detection unit (210, see Par. 0038 in the attached translation) that detects approach of or contact with an object is provided on an outer side of a side surface in the first direction of the exterior portion. Regarding claim 17, wherein an openable lid (1001, see figure 10) is provided on an upper surface of the exterior portion. Regarding claim 18, Kamikawa discloses a robot apparatus comprising: a main body portion (150); a plurality of legs (110,120,130,140) connected to the main body portion via joints (114,124,134,144) rotatable about an axis extending in a first direction that is parallel to a traveling surface (see figures 5 and 6); and an exterior portion (600, see figure 6) that covers both sides in the first direction of the main body portion and an upper side of the main body portion opposite to a side near the traveling surface to enclose the main body portion and the plurality of legs (see figure 6) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamikawa in view of Amino (US 9016158) . Regarding claim 9, Kamikawa does not mention wheels on the distal end of the legs. However, Amino discloses a robot with legs (6,7) wherein the legs have wheels (see figure 1) at the distal ends. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current application, to modify Kamikawa by adding wheels to the distal ends of the legs, in order to be able to move the mobile inject smoothly in an area where the ground is leveled and maintained. Regarding claim 14, Kamikawa does mention a robot having 3, five or more legs in Par. 0022; Kamikawa does not mention having 3 legs in the front. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kamikawa by having the mobile object have 3 legs in the front, as it is obvious to have the same number of legs in the front as it is to have legs in the back of a mobile object like Kamikawa’s, wherein 3 of the legs can be placed in the front end of the mobile object and 3 of the legs can be placed on the rear end of the mobile object to ensure balanced performance of the mobile object . Allowable Subject Matter 07-43-02 AIA 9. Claim s 11-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim 11, the art of record did not include “a projecting portion having a shape that reversely tapers toward a distal end opposite to a rear end at which the leg is connected to the main body portion”. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marlon A Arce whose telephone number is (571)272-1341. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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. /MARLON A ARCE/Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/683,303 Page 2 Art Unit: 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/683,303 Page 3 Art Unit: 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/683,303 Page 4 Art Unit: 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/683,303 Page 5 Art Unit: 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/683,303 Page 6 Art Unit: 3611
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 13, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12746817
VEHICLE BEHAVIOR CONTROL DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12745709
ELECTRIC WORK VEHICLE
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12734716
QUADRUPED ROBOT AND SPINE-LEG-FOOT COUPLING DRIVING METHOD
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12728947
ELECTRIC FOLDING VEHICLE
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12728577
SUPPORT FOR A WATERCRAFT
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+11.0%)
2y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1270 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