Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/933,057

MEDIUM PROCESSING APPARATUS AND IMAGE FORMING SYSTEM INCORPORATING SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 31, 2024
Priority
Nov 21, 2023 — JP 2023-197422
Examiner
NICHOLSON III, LESLIE AUGUST
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Ricoh Company, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
1183 granted / 1340 resolved
+28.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1352
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
27.1%
-12.9% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1340 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Priority 1. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Claims 1,4,6,8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ishihara PGPub 2017/0087795. Ishihara discloses, regarding claim 1, A medium processing apparatus comprising: a placing portion (24) on which multiple media including a medium are placed; a crimp binder (28,51) to apply pressure and deform the multiple media to bind the multiple media on the placing portion as a crimp binding process; and circuitry (fig.7) configured to, when binding N sheets of the multiple media: cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process when M sheets of the multiple media smaller than the N sheets (M<N) are placed on the placing portion; and cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process again when all the N sheets of the multiple media are placed on the placing portion (see at least ¶0015,0016,0022,0090,0091; fig.10). Regarding claim 4, wherein the circuitry is further configured to: cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process, at a predetermined binding position (PB1), on the M sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion; and cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process again, at the predetermined binding position, on all the N sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion (at least ¶0015,0021,0099,0100 discloses the second binding position PB2 can be anywhere, including partially or completely overlapping first binding position PB1). Regarding claim 6, wherein the circuitry is further configured to: cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process, at a first binding position (PB1), on the M sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion; and cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process again, at a second binding position (PB2) different from the first binding position, on all the N sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion (fig.10). Regarding claim 8, wherein the circuitry is further configured to cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process of a first time when the M sheets of the multiple media are placed on the placing portion, where a number of the N sheets is equal to or larger than a threshold (the N number is the number of sheets bound at binding part PB2, greater than the number of sheets bound at binding part PB1; see at least ¶0015,0016,0022,0090,0091; fig.10). Regarding claim 9, wherein the circuitry is further configured to cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process of a first time when N sheets of the multiple media are placed on the placing portion, where a number of the N sheets is smaller than a threshold (the threshold can be interpreted as the maximum number of sheets that can be safely bound by the stapleless binding unit without damaging the binding unit, therefore, the number of sheets N that are bound will always be less than this threshold). Regarding claim 10, An image forming system (fig.1) comprising: an image forming apparatus (B) to form an image on a medium; and the medium processing apparatus (C) according to claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 5. 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. 6. Claims 5,7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishihara PGPub 2017/0087795 in view of Kawamura PGPub 2023/0348222. Ishihara discloses substantially all the limitations of the claims (see ¶4 above), but does not expressly disclose the limitations of claims 5,7. Kawamura teaches the apparatus further comprising a liquid applier (95s; see at least fig.1, ¶0024,0025,0126) to apply liquid to the medium to be placed on the placing portion, [further regarding claim 5] wherein the circuitry is further configured to: cause the liquid applier to apply the liquid, to at least one of first to M-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the binding position; and cause the liquid applier to apply liquid again, to at least one of (M+1)-th to N-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the binding position (the adhesive is applied to each sheet, as shown in at least ¶0037,0081,0111), and [further regarding claim 7] wherein the circuitry is further configured to: cause the liquid applier to apply liquid, to at least one of first to M-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the first binding position; and cause the liquid applier to apply liquid, to at least one of first to N-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the second binding position (the adhesive is applied to each sheet, as shown in at least ¶0037,0081,0111). Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide a liquid applier to apply liquid to the medium to be placed on the placing portion, wherein the circuitry is further configured to: cause the liquid applier to apply the liquid, to at least one of first to M-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the binding position; and cause the liquid applier to apply liquid again, to at least one of (M+1)-th to N-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the binding position, and wherein the circuitry is further configured to: cause the liquid applier to apply liquid, to at least one of first to M-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the first binding position; and cause the liquid applier to apply liquid, to at least one of first to N-th sheets of the multiple media on the placing portion, at the second binding position, as taught by Kawamura, in the device of Ishihara, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of binding each sheet to one another and the second group of sheets to the first group of sheets, thus creating a product in which a very large number of sheets can be bound together (¶0110). Allowable Subject Matter 7. Claims 2,3 are 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not fairly disclose or suggest, wherein the circuitry is further configured to, when a number of the N sheets is an even number: cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process for a first time when the M sheets of the multiple media are placed on the placing portion, where a number of the M sheets is (N×½−2) or more and less than N, or wherein the circuitry is further configured to, when a number of the N sheets is an odd number: cause the crimp binder to perform the crimp binding process for a first time when the M sheets of the multiple media are placed on the placing portion, where a number of the M sheets is (N×½−2.5) or more and less than N (emphasis added by Examiner). Conclusion 8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Watanabe (USP 9,110,425) discloses applying adhesive (Pc) to each sheet in a bundle of sheets to be bound (see at least fig.5, C2/L3-10,20-24). 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESLIE A. NICHOLSON III whose telephone number is (571)272-5487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4. 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, Michael C McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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. /LESLIE A NICHOLSON III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653 6/5/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679687
MEDIUM STACKING DEVICE, PRINTING SYSTEM, AND CONTROL METHOD OF MEDIUM STACKING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679689
SHEET HANDLING APPARATUS THAT HANDLES MULTIPLE SHEETS AND IMAGE FORMING SYSTEM
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679688
MEDIUM PROCESSING APPARATUS AND IMAGE FORMING SYSTEM INCORPORATING SAME
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12654975
MEDIUM PROCESSING APPARATUS AND IMAGE FORMING SYSTEM INCORPORATING SAME
2y 2m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12649321
PRINTING SYSTEM
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
88%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+5.2%)
2y 1m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1340 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