Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/992,520

OPENING/CLOSING CONTROL SYSTEM, OPENING/CLOSING DEVICE, AND OPENING/CLOSING CONTROL METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 08, 2025
Examiner
ADNAN, MUHAMMAD
Art Unit
2688
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
374 granted / 552 resolved
+5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
577
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
§103
64.2%
+24.2% vs TC avg
§102
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 552 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 . Claim Status Claims 19-42 were previously pending, of which claims 19, 28-31, 33-37 and 40 were elected. Therefore, claims 20-27, 32, 38, 39, 41 and 42 are withdrawn from consideration and claims 19, 28-31, 33-37 and 40 are pending for examination in this Office action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 19, 33, 37 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuna et al. (Yuna; JP 2020133985) in view of Bostick et al. (Bostick; US 2018/0225935) and further in view of Wishne et al. (Wishne; US 2017/0169506). As per claim 19, Yuna teaches an opening/closing control system to control opening/closing of an opening/closing target, the opening/closing control system comprising a processor (a control device, for example, see e.g. para. [0055]) to: recognize an opening/closing person who performs an opening/closing action on the opening/closing target (recognizing a person who wants to open a locked refrigerator door; see e.g. para. [0055-51]); perform lock control to control unlocking or locking of the opening/closing target according to the opening/closing person (lock control is performed by keeping the door locked or unlocking; see e.g. para. [0055-57]); and perform the lock control according to the personality (lock control is performed based on personality, i.e. identity of the individual as discussed earlier; see e.g. para. [0055-60]). However, Yuna does not explicitly teach to perform output control to output notification content to the opening/closing person according to the opening/closing person, wherein performing the output control based on the notification content is according to a personality of the opening/closing target or a lock, the personality being set in association with the opening/closing person. Bostick, however, teaches performing output control to output notification content to a person according to the approaching person or individual to an appliance (visually recognizing a person/individual as well as other characteristics of the approaching person/individual and outputting notifications accordingly; see e.g. para. [0038-39]), wherein performing the output control based on the notification content is according to a personality of the target or a lock (the output notification is based on identified person/individual; see e.g. para. [0038-39]), the personality being set in association with the opening/closing person (the personality, i.e. fingerprint identity, facial features, age etc., is being set in association with the person/individual; see e.g. para. [0038-40] of Bostick and para. [0055-60]). Even though Bostick does not explicitly teach that the outputted notification content to the opening/closing person, Yuna teaches that access to the appliance, a refrigerator in this case, is limited to an authorized user only as discussed earlier. It would have been obvious from to a person having ordinary skill in the art to output notification to an approaching or opening/closing person for better understanding regarding authority or prohibition. Yuna and Bostick are in a same or similar field of endeavor, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of improved warning for a monitored object as suggested by Bostick (see e.g. para. [0001] and [0004]). Yuna and Bostick do not teach that the personality being a character of a person different from the opening/closing person. Wishne, however, teaches a generating an output through a display interface and/or through a sound interface, wherein the outputted voice can be selected including but not limited to a celebrity voice (see e.g. para. [0044]). Similarly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to output notification via a display and/or sounder interface, wherein the outputting display and/or sound in the disclosed systems of Yuna and/or Bostick can be done using a character of a person different from the opening/closing person, a celebrity for example. Yuna, Bostick and Wishne are in a same or similar field of endeavor, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of improving user experience or improve effect of the outputted notification which is desired. As per claim 33, the opening/closing control system according to claim 19 as taught by Yuna, Bostick and Wishne, wherein the processor performs the lock control according to a position where the recognized opening/closing person touches the opening/closing target, an approach speed of the opening/closing person, or date and time information when the opening/closing person is recognized (time information when unlocking is authorized, see e.g. para. [0021-22], wherein it would have been obvious to program the system for a date in addition to time for improved security). As per claim 37 and 40, they are interpreted and rejected as claim 19. Claims 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuna in view of Bostick, Wishne and further in view of Learmonth et al. (Learmonth; US 2024/0193979). As per claim 28, the opening/closing control system according to Claim 19 as taught by Yuna, Bostick and Wishne, further comprising a lock to perform the unlocking or the locking on the opening/closing target (a lock device 20 as taught by Yuna and discussed earlier, see e.g. para. [0055]), wherein Yuna does not explicitly teach at least one of the lock and a battery that supplies power to the lock is attachable and detachable. Learmonth, however, teaches at least one of lock and a battery which supplies power to one or more system in the lock (see e.g. para. [0056]). Yuna, Bostick, Wishne and Learmonth are in a same or similar field of preventing access for an authorized person, therefore it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of security as well as ease of use as suggested by Learmonth (see e.g. para. [0003]). As per claim 29, the opening/closing control system according to claim 28 as taught by Yuna, Bostick, Wishne and Learmonth, wherein the lock, which is attachable and detachable, includes an image sensor to perform imaging for recognizing the opening/closing person (the preceding claim comprises “at least one of the lock and a battery…is attachable and detachable” which indicated that one of the lock or the battery is portable or attachable or detachable) (Learmonth teaches the lock comprises an image sensor, see e.g. para. [0047], to perform imaging for recognizing an opening/closing person). As per claim 30, the opening/closing control system according to claim 28 as taught by Yuna Bostick, Wishne and Learmonth, wherein the lock is in an unlocked state when the battery is attached and detached (the battery pack 20, installed from interior or inside of door, see e.g. para. [0037] of Learmonth, which means the lock is in unlocked state when the user accessed the door). Claim 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuna in view of Bostick, Wishne and further in view of Estill et al. (Estill; US 2021/0279680). As per claim 34, the opening/closing control system according to claim 19, as taught by Yuna, Bostick and Wishne, wherein outputting notification according to the recognized opening/closing person is discussed in analysis of merits of claim 19. The disclosed Yuna and Bostick fail to teach the processor outputs the notification content to deter or warn about the opening/closing action. Estill, however, outputting notification content to deter or warn about the opening/closing action (signaling a proximity notification of presence, wherein this signaling aids in directing legitimate approaches to the lock box, or deter illegitimate interest; see e.g. para. [0245-246]). Yuna, Bostick and Estill are in a same or similar field of preventing access for an authorized person, therefore it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of reducing unauthorized access or tampering. Claim 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuna in view of Bostick, Wishne and further in view of Won et al. (Won; US 2015/0161909). As per claim 35, the opening/closing control system according to claim 19 taught by Yuna, Bostick and Wishne, except the claimed wherein the processor outputs the notification content according to the opening/closing target or contents held in the opening/closing target. Won, however, teaches outputs notification content according to opening/closing target or contents held in the opening/closing target (displaying a notification about contents held inside the fridge, see e.g. FIG. 4). Yuna, Bostick, Wishne and Won are in a same or similar field of endeavor, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of increased awareness about inside of a refrigerator which in turn may save time. Claims 31 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuna in view of Bostick, Wishne and further in view of Magnussen et al. (Magnussen; US 2014/0046495). As per claim 36, the opening/closing control system according to claim 19 and taught by Yuna, Bostick and Wishne, except the claimed wherein the processor outputs the notification content according to a status of the opening/closing action for the opening/closing target. Magnussen, however, teaches outputs notification content according to a status of opening/closing action for opening/closing target (a display to output notification which indicates a status of door opening sensor (see e.g. para. [0089), opening/opening closing status determiner, for opening/closing to access interior of the refrigerator). Yuna, Bostick, Wishne and Magnussen are in a same or similar field of endeavor, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of increased user awareness regarding number of times door is opened, for example, and take measures to reduce energy consumption accordingly. As per claim 31, the opening/closing control system according to claim 19 as taught by Yuna, Bostick and Wishne, except the claimed wherein the processor outputs the notification content for encouraging the opening/closing person to improve their behavior according to a usage status of the opening/closing person. Magnussen, however, teaches detecting status or a usage status of the opening/closing of the disclosed refrigerator and generating a notification (see e.g. para. [0089]). Even though the notification is not for encouraging the opening/closing person to improve their usage status, it would have been obvious to generate the notification to encourage users to improve their usage status to conserve energy which is desired. Yuna, Bostick, Wishne and Magnussen are in a same or similar field of endeavor, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine their teachings for the purpose of increased user awareness regarding number of times door is opened, for example, to reduce energy consumption accordingly. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 MUHAMMAD ADNAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3705. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 10AM-6PM. 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, Steven Lim can be reached on 571-270-1210. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MUHAMMAD ADNAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 08, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597325
Coin Anti-Theft Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586451
HALL MONITOR FOR A HEALTH CARE FACILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580581
Low Parasitic Capacitance Architecture for Successive Approximation Register Analog-to-Digital Converters
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573299
NETWORK BASED SENSOR SHARING FOR COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570213
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NOTIFYING PASSENGERS OF NEARBY OBJECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
68%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+29.2%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 552 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