Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/747,449

INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 19, 2024
Examiner
WOODS, BRANDON SEAN
Art Unit
2845
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nidec Instruments Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
83 granted / 99 resolved
+15.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
124
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
53.8%
+13.8% vs TC avg
§102
32.7%
-7.3% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 99 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed December 17th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues in page 5 that “it is not possible to stably determine the position of the loop antenna 1 relative to the surface of the first resin housing 9”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Futoshi explicitly teaches, in para. 0039 that the first spacer, 3, is able to keep the distance between the loop antenna and the case at a constant, thereby keeping it stable. Further, the applicant argues in page 6 ”there is no suggestion to use a spacer to position the tip of the screw on the opposite side of the board from the first surface”. Examiner disagrees. The combination of the prior art of Futoshi and Ghima does disclose this. As seen in fig. 2a of Futoshi, and fig. 4c of Ghima, even without explicit language denoting this purpose, it is clear that the tip of the screw is on the opposite side of the board, with relation to the first surface of the case. Furthermore, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1, 3, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futoshi et al. (JP 2005026743 A), herein referred to as Futoshi and further in view of Ghima et al. (US 20240014576 A1), herein referred to as Ghima. Regarding claim 1, Futoshi discloses an information processing device for performing communication with a medium in a non-contact manner (para. 0001, previously attached translation) comprising: a case (comprising the combination of 9 and 10) comprising a first face (top) part to which a medium is brought close; an antenna board (6) which faces the first face part (see fig. 2a) in an inside of the case and includes an antenna (1) for communicating with the medium; and a screw (18) made of metal which is fastened to a screw hole (17) formed in the case (fig. 2a) to fix the antenna board to the case (see fig. 2a, 6 is attached to inner member of 10, screw attaches 10 to 9); wherein, the case comprises: a first case (9) having the first face part, and a second case (10) having a second face part facing the first face part (see fig. 2a), in an arrangement direction in which the first face part and the antenna board are arranged, when a side where the first face part is located is referred to as a first side, and a side where the antenna board is located is referred to as a second side(see fig. 2a, the bottom is the second side, where the screw is located), the first case comprises a support part (inner member of 10, see fig. 2a) that supports the antenna board (6) in the arrangement direction (see fig. 2a), the screw (18) is fastened to the screw hole (17) through the second face part from the second side to fix the second case to the first case (see fig. 2a), when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the arrangement direction, a tip end part of the screw is located on the second side with respect to the antenna board (see fig. 2a, the bottom is the second side, where the screw is located), and the screw is not overlapped with the antenna board (see fig. 2a). Futoshi does not disclose a spacer is between the antenna board and a head part of the screw in the arrangement direction, and a protruded part formed with the screw hole and protruding from the first face part to the second side, the antenna board comprises a hole part receiving the protruded part, the spacer has a tube shape receiving the protruded part, wherein the spacer presses the antenna board to the support part by a fastening force of the screw fastened to the screw hole. However, Ghima discloses a spacer (16b) between the antenna board (5) and a head part (18b) of the screw (18) in the arrangement direction (see fig. 4c), and a protruded part (11) formed with the screw hole and protruding from the first face part to the second side, the antenna board (5) comprises a hole part (16, 16a) receiving the protruded part, the spacer has a tube shape receiving the protruded part, wherein the spacer presses the antenna board to the support part (see fig. 3) by a fastening force of the screw fastened to the screw hole (para. 0006). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the device of Futoshi with a spacer is between the antenna board and a head part of the screw in the arrangement direction, and a protruded part formed with the screw hole and protruding from the first face part to the second side, the antenna board comprises a hole part receiving the protruded part, the spacer has a tube shape receiving the protruded part, wherein the spacer presses the antenna board to the support part by a fastening force of the screw fastened to the screw hole, as taught by Ghima, to ensure all components are mounted together (para. 0006). Regarding claim 3, Futoshi and Ghima render obvious all limitations of base claim 1. Futoshi also discloses further comprising a control board (5) for controlling the antenna board (6). Futoshi does not disclose wherein the antenna board is disposed at an end part on the second side of the spacer, wherein the screw is fastened to the screw hole through the control board. However, the teachings of Ghima do teach connecting the control board (electronic module 2) with the same screw and screw hole to the antenna board (5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of the references and make the modified device of Futoshi wherein the screw is fastened to the screw hole through the control board, as suggested by Ghima, to ensure all components are mounted together (para. 0006). Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the modified device of Futoshi wherein the antenna board is disposed at an end part on the second side of the spacer, in order to keep the circuitry from interfering with the non-contact operation, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. Regarding claim 6, Futoshi and Ghima render obvious all limitations of base claim 1. Futoshi also discloses wherein the antenna (1) is provided on a face (top) on the first side of the antenna board (6). Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON S WOODS whose telephone number is (571)270-1525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 6:00 pm. 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at 571-270-7893. 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. /BRANDON SEAN WOODS/Examiner, Art Unit 2845 /DIMARY S LOPEZ CRUZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 19, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 17, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603445
ANTENNA SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597697
SUBSTRATE ON WHICH CONDUCTIVE PATTERN IS ARRANGED, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592478
ANTENNA DESIGNS FOR HEARING INSTRUMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586914
ANTENNA ARRANGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580317
DIPOLE ANTENNA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 99 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