Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 19/106,902

CLEANING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Feb 26, 2025
Priority
Aug 31, 2022 — JP 2022-137957 +1 more
Examiner
KIM, CHRISTOPHER S
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Koito Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 11m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
715 granted / 1133 resolved
+3.1% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
1178
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
§102
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
§112
40.7%
+0.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1133 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 § 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 1-6 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation “a cover…and configured to move the nozzle along the first axis” in lines 7-8. The specification does not appear to disclose the cover 11 moving the nozzle 16 along the first axis A1. It appears that the nozzle 16 is moved by the piston 13 and the cover 11 merely following the motion of the nozzle 16. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the outside" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim fails to define a reference to determine “outside.” Claim 1 recites the limitation "the inside" in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim fails to define a reference to determine “inside.” Claim 1 recites the limitation “a positioning member” in line 15. It appears to be a double inclusion of the holder 14 because the positioning member 17 appears to be an element of the holder 14. See the specification, paragraph 0023. Claim 4 is further evidence. Claim 2 recites the limitation “adapted to be attached to the support” in line 1. It is uncertain what is adapted to be attached to the support. It cannot be the cleaning device because the support is part of the cleaning device. Claim 3 recites the limitation “located inside” in line 2. The claim fails to define a reference to determine “inside.” Claim 5 recites the limitation “a mobility” in line 2. It is uncertain what constitutes “a mobility.” Claim 6 recites the limitation "the target" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claims are replete with indefiniteness. Limited time for examination precludes a complete editorial review. Applicant is required the review and amendment all of the claims in their entirety to ensure full compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Applicant should not misconstrue any lack of art rejection as an indication of allowable subject matter. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-4905. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30. 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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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. /CHRISTOPHER S KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 CHRISTOPHER S. KIM Examiner Art Unit 3752 CK
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 26, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703558
DISPENSING SYSTEMS
4y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12691316
MONITORING AND EXTINGUISHING DEVICE
3y 2m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12691459
Hand-Held Paint Sprayer
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12678809
WATER OUTLET DEVICE WITH COLD WATER DISCHARGING FUNCTION
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12667095
Rotating Nozzle for Agricultural Crop Sprayer
3y 5m 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
63%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+21.4%)
3y 5m (~1y 11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1133 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