Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/986,632

LIQUID EJECTION HEAD AND LIQUID EJECTION APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 18, 2024
Priority
May 17, 2024 — JP 2024-081238
Examiner
UHLENHAKE, JASON S
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Riso Technologies Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
1032 granted / 1184 resolved
+27.2% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-2.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1213
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
80.6%
+40.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1184 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito (EP 3912819) Regarding claim 1, a liquid ejection head comprising: a nozzle (1014) (Paragraph 0033); a pressure chamber (1154) that is capable of storing liquid and communicates with the nozzle, a volume of the pressure chamber being varied to eject the liquid from the nozzle (Figures 7-9; Paragraphs 0031, 0038-0040) An actuator (chamber walls of piezoelectric material) configured to vary the volume of the pressure chamber in response to a drive signal; and a drive circuit (103; Figure 2) configured to generate the drive signal (Paragraphs 0044-0046; Figures 7-9) Wherein the pressure chamber has one of states including: A steady state in which the volume is unchanged (Figure 7), An expanded state in which the volume is expanded (Figure 8), and a contracted state in which the volume is contracted (Figure 9) The drive signal (Figure 10) includes: A first waveform that caused the pressure chamber to transition from the steady state to the contracted state, and then transition from the contracted state to either the steady state or the expanded state (Paragraphs 0048-0049; Figure 10; the first waveform comprises the pulse B and the holding element Raa; pulse B reduces the volume of the pressure chamber to bring it to a contracted state) A second waveform for causing the liquid to be ejected from the nozzle, wherein the second waveform is subsequent to the first waveform and causes the pressure chamber to transition ether from the steady state to the expanded state, and then transition from the expanded state to the steady state, or directly transition from the expanded state to the steady state (second waveform comprises Da and Rab; the pulse Da causes a droplet ejection and Da is an expansion pulse; Paragraph 0051) A third waveform that is subsequent to the second waveform and causes the pressure chamber to transition from the steady state to the contracted state, and then transition from the contracted state to the steady state (Paragraph 0053; the third waveform comprises Pa; the pulse width of Pa is 2AL) A fourth waveform that is subsequent to the third waveform and causes the pressure chamber to transition from the steady state to the expanded state, and then transition from the expanded state to the steady state (the fourth waveform comprises Rea, DMP and Reb; Paragraph 0058; a length of LDR is 1AL or less) (Figures 7-10; Paragraphs 0047-0065) A duration of the fourth waveform (1 AL) is shorter than a duration of the third waveform (2AL), and is at least 1 µs or 0.5 times half cycle of a main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid in the pressure chamber so that the fourth waveform does not cause the liquid to be ejected from nozzle (duration of the fourth waveform is 1AL; 1AL is equal 2.55 µs and therefore the fourth waveform is longer than 1 µs; Paragraph 0065) Regarding claims 2, 12, a duration of the first waveform is less than or equal to the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid (Figure 10; Paragraph 0066; LB is 1.4 µs and therefore less than 1AL [2.55 µs]) Regarding claims 4, 14, a duration between an end of the second waveform and a beginning of the third waveform is less than or equal to 0.5 times the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid (Paragraph 0066; LR is 0.2 µs) Regarding claims 5, 15, a time difference between a center of the third waveform and a center of the fourth waveform is twice the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid (Figure 10; Paragraph 0066) Regarding claims 6, 16, a duration of the second waveform is the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid (Figure 10; Paragraph 0066) Regarding claims 7, 17, a duration of the first waveform is equal to the duration of the second waveform (Figure 10; Paragraph 0066) Regarding claims 8, 18, the drive signal is a signal of a voltage applied to the actuator, and a first voltage of a first value is applied to the actuator when the pressure chamber is in the steady state; the first waveform includes a second voltage of a second value that is greater than the first value, and the second waveform includes a third voltage of a third value that is lower than the first value (Figure 10; Paragraphs 0038-0063, 0066) Regarding claims 9, 19, the third waveform includes a fourth voltage of the second value (Figure 10; Paragraph 0066) Regarding claims 10, 20, wherein the fourth waveform includes a fifth voltage of the third value (Figure 10; Paragraph 0066) Regarding claim 11, a liquid ejection apparatus comprising: a plurality of rollers for conveying a print medium; and a liquid ejection head configured to eject liquid onto the conveyed medium (Figure 1) including: a nozzle (1014) (Paragraph 0033); a pressure chamber (1154) that is capable of storing liquid and communicates with the nozzle, a volume of the pressure chamber being varied to eject the liquid from the nozzle (Figures 7-9; Paragraphs 0031, 0038-0040) An actuator (chamber walls of piezoelectric material) configured to vary the volume of the pressure chamber in response to a drive signal; and a drive circuit (103; Figure 2) configured to generate the drive signal (Paragraphs 0044-0046; Figures 7-9) Wherein the pressure chamber has one of states including: A steady state in which the volume is unchanged (Figure 7), An expanded state in which the volume is expanded (Figure 8), and a contracted state in which the volume is contracted (Figure 9) The drive signal (Figure 10) includes: A first waveform that caused the pressure chamber to transition from the steady state to the contracted state, and then transition from the contracted state to either the steady state or the expanded state (Paragraphs 0048-0049; Figure 10; the first waveform comprises the pulse B and the holding element Raa; pulse B reduces the volume of the pressure chamber to bring it to a contracted state) A second waveform for causing the liquid to be ejected from the nozzle, wherein the second waveform is subsequent to the first waveform and causes the pressure chamber to transition ether from the steady state to the expanded state, and then transition from the expanded state to the steady state, or directly transition from the expanded state to the steady state (second waveform comprises Da and Rab; the pulse Da causes a droplet ejection and Da is an expansion pulse; Paragraph 0051) A third waveform that is subsequent to the second waveform and causes the pressure chamber to transition from the steady state to the contracted state, and then transition from the contracted state to the steady state (Paragraph 0053; the third waveform comprises Pa; the pulse width of Pa is 2AL) A fourth waveform that is subsequent to the third waveform and causes the pressure chamber to transition from the steady state to the expanded state, and then transition from the expanded state to the steady state (the fourth waveform comprises Rea, DMP and Reb; Paragraph 0058; a length of LDR is 1AL or less) (Figures 7-10; Paragraphs 0047-0065) A duration of the fourth waveform (1 AL) is shorter than a duration of the third waveform (2AL), and is at least 1 µs or 0.5 times half cycle of a main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid in the pressure chamber so that the fourth waveform does not cause the liquid to be ejected from nozzle (duration of the fourth waveform is 1AL; 1AL is equal 2.55 µs and therefore the fourth waveform is longer than 1 µs; Paragraph 0065) 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. Claim(s) 3, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (EP 3912819) Regarding claims 3, 13, Ito discloses the claimed invention except for a duration of the first waveform is at least three times the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date at the time the invention was made to use a duration of the first waveform is at least three times the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine sill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a duration of the first waveform is at least three times the half cycle of the main acoustic resonance frequency of the liquid, for the purpose of providing a liquid ejection head and a liquid ejection device that can change an ejection amount without changing a head structure Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON S UHLENHAKE whose telephone number is (571)272-5916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Douglas X. Rodriguez 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. /JASON S UHLENHAKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 June 1, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679094
LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD, LIQUID DISCHARGE APPARATUS, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673492
LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD SUBSTRATE, LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD, LIQUID DISCHARGE APPARATUS, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD SUBSTRATE
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673490
LIQUID DISCHARGE HEAD AND LIQUID DISCHARGE APPARATUS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668066
IMAGE FORMATION METHOD AND INKJET RECORDING APPARATUS
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12668053
PRINTING APPARATUS AND MANAGEMENT METHOD
2y 2m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
87%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (-2.1%)
2y 2m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1184 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