Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/785,194

METHOD FOR DETERMINING A DRYING PROCEDURE OF A PRINTED PRODUCT AND INDUSTRIAL PRINTING MACHINE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 26, 2024
Priority
Aug 03, 2023 — EU 23189466.8
Examiner
SHENDEROV, ALEXANDER D
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Bobst Mex S.A.
OA Round
2 (Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
803 granted / 891 resolved
+22.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 7m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
900
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
46.7%
+6.7% vs TC avg
§102
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 891 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, Claim 1 recites, and its dependent Claims 2-20 incorporate, inter alia, “wherein the ratio comprises two fractions, one referring to a drying power applied by infrared radiation and another one referring to a drying power applied by convective heating”. While the original disclosure teaches that “drying power comprises two fractions, one referring to a drying power applied by means of IR radiation and another one referring to a drying power applied by means of convective heating” (§0017 of the instant Specification), it does not teach a ratio of the two fractions. Please note §0025, while teaching completely turning off (0%) one or the other source of drying power for a ratio of 100% for the remaining source, provides no instruction on how to practice the invention in case of specific intermediate values, or how to arrive at such specific intermediate values. Please note that a “fraction” is not mentioned in the original Specification other than in §0017 and §0025. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV whose telephone number is (571)270-7049. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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 Rodrigues 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. /ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV/Examiner, Art Unit 2853 /JASON S UHLENHAKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 04, 2026
Interview Requested
Jun 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 11, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 29, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703184
LIQUID REPLENISHMENT CONTAINER
2y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12697817
LIQUID CONTAINER, INK CARTRIDGE, AND LIQUID DISCHARGE APPARATUS
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12697822
LIQUID EJECTION DEVICE
2y 2m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12686227
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING PANELS HAVING A DECORATIVE SURFACE
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12679109
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR APPLYING PRIMER TO DIFFERENT SIZES OF MEDIA IN INKJET PRINTERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+6.3%)
1y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 891 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