Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/982,271

SHEET CONVEYING DEVICE, IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, AND SHEET PROCESSING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 16, 2024
Examiner
CICCHINO, PATRICK D
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ricoh Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
628 granted / 780 resolved
+28.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
808
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 780 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koshida (US Pat No 9,651,913). Regarding claim 1, Koshida discloses a sheet conveying device comprising: a body (1); a first guide (e.g. opposed to 37, shown in figure 2) in the body; a cover (93) to open and close the body to expose at least a part of the first guide at an opened state of the cover; a second guide (37) in the cover, the second guide facing the first guide to form a sheet conveyance path at a closed state of the cover; a detector to detect a sheet passing through the sheet conveyance path, the detector including: a feeler (121) in the cover and movable relative to the second guide, the feeler including: a detected portion (121b) movable in conjunction with the sheet passing through the sheet conveyance path; and a contacted portion (121a) attached to the detected portion; and a photosensor (122) in the body, the photosensor having a detection region in which the detected portion entering the detection region is detected by the photosensor; and a positioner (302) in the body to contact the contacted portion to position the detected portion in the detection region when the sheet is not in the sheet conveyance path. It is noted that the positioner disclosed by Koshida is not disposed in the body. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device taught by Koshida such that the body included the positioner instead of the cover, thereby performing the same action required by Koshida for a slightly different position within the apparatus. The functionality disclosed by Koshida would not change, merely the position of the disclosed regulating portion, which would still provide the disclosed critical function of receiving the weight of the light shielding portion. Such a modification would merely require a simple rearrangement of parts, requiring routine skill in the art. Regarding claim 2, Koshida discloses the photosensor and the positioner are disposed at the first guide. Regarding claim 3, it is noted that Koshida fails to disclose the photosensor and positioner being integral. However, it’s been held that making pieces integral is obvious engineering choice (see MPEP 2144.04) and further the applicant’s reasoning for making the parts integral do not impart insights which is not understood in the art. Therefore it would have been obvious at the time of filing to have made these parts integral with one another. Regarding claim 4, Koshida discloses wherein a rotatable angle of the feeler at the closed state of the cover is smaller than a rotatable angle of the feeler at the opened state of the cover (e.g. since the regulation portion only comes into contact with the light shielding portion while in the closed position). Regarding claim 7, Koshida discloses a spring (190) in the second guide to bias the feeler against the positioner. Regarding claim 9, Koshida discloses a support shaft (92a) disposed in the body and rotatably supporting the cover; and a reinforcement (36) in the cover, wherein the reinforcement is closer to the support shaft than to the feeler. Regarding claim 10, Koshida discloses a sheet conveying device (shown in figure 1). Regarding claim 11, Koshida disclose a fixing device exposed by opening the cover (shown in figures 2-4). Regarding claim 12, Koshida discloses a sheet processing device (shown in figure 1). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5, 6, and 8 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: None of the prior art on record discloses or suggests each and every limitation of the applicant’s claims. Specifically, the additional contacted portion and it’s relative position, the claimed additional structure of the feeler (including the additional contacted portion), and the first and second guide engagement. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cited art generally discloses features believed to be relevant to the applicant’s claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick Cicchino whose telephone number is (571)270-1954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM to 5PM. 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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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. /Patrick Cicchino/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 16, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601398
VENT BOX BAFFLE INSERT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600585
Lifting Device and Electrode Sheet Transfer Apparatus Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595144
MEDIA FEEDING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583703
SHEET CONVEYING DEVICE, AUTOMATIC DOCUMENT FEEDER, AND IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583705
MEDIUM LOADING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
80%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 780 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