DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the nozzle having an abnormal ejection characteristic,” “the mask,” “the liquid at each ejection position.” “each ejection position,” “the ejecting positions whose value is changed base on the mask” and “the adjacent nozzles that correspond to the ejecting positions at which the liquid is ejected” lack antecedent basis.
Further, the claim recites “the ejecting positions…is the ejecting positions…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 11 is 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 claim recites “a plurality of masks” but then proceeds to recite “the mask.” It is unclear as to which of the plurality of masks the mask is intended to refer. Further, the claim recites “the ejection positions whose value is changed…” However, multiple ejection positions would seem to have multiple values, not a single value, asl claimed. The claim also recites a case in which the abnormal nozzle “is a normal nozzle.” While the intention of the claimed language is understood, a nozzle can either be normal or abnormal, and thus to state that an abnormal nozzle can be a normal nozzle is not possible.
Clarification is required.
Because all other claims depend from claim 11, they are also rejected on this basis.
Note that, based on the uncertainty created by the indefiniteness of claim 11, the best rejection has been asserted in light of what is actually understood.
Claim 14 is 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 claim recites “each position of the liquid ejecting target,” but the claimed positions have not been defined in any way.
Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sudo et al. (2015/0258785).
Regarding claim 11, Sudo teaches a liquid ejecting device that ejects a liquid through and inkjet method comprising:
an inkjet head (fig. 3, item 61) including a plurality of nozzles (fig. 3, items 64) arranged with positions shifted from each other in a nozzle row direction that is predetermined (see fig. 3, note nozzle row direction)
a scanning driver (fig. 3, item 51) that causes the inkjet head to perform a main scan of ejecting the liquid while relatively moving a main scanning direction (fig. 3, direction of belt movement 52) intersecting the nozzle row direction with respect to a liquid ejecting target (fig. 3, item 400);
a controller (fig. 3, item 100) that controls operation of the inkjet head and the scanning driver (see fig. 3); and
a mask storage ([0107], note that several mask patterns can be used, and a storage for those mask patterns is necessarily present) that stores a plurality of masks different from each other ([0107]),
wherein
when an abnormal nozzle (fig. 10, nozzle PXL) which is the nozzle having an abnormal ejection characteristic is present (see fig. 10);
the controller is configured to change, based on the mask, a value corresponding to an amount of the liquid at each ejection position where the liquid is ejected from at least one nozzle among adjacent nozzles adjacent to the abnormal nozzle in the nozzle row direction during the main scan (see fig. 10, note that “each ejection position” is being taken to correspond to the first two positions of source data 300, and note that, where abnormal nozzle PXL would have deposited medium dots were it in working order, adjacent nozzle PX1 increases its ejection amount from medium dots to large dots), and
the ejecting positions whose value is changes based on the mask is the ejection positions of the adjacent nozzles that correspond to the ejecting positions at which the liquid is ejected when the abnormal nozzle is a normal nozzle (see fig. 10).
Regarding claim 12, Sudo teaches wherein the amount of liquid ejected by adjacent nozzle PX1 is changed based on a mask ([0107], see fig. 10).
Regarding claim 13, Sudo teaches wherein volumes of liquid are changes are changed for preset numbers of ejection positions ([0107], see fig. 10. Note here, that, as defined in the claim 11 rejection, the preset number is two, corresponding to the first two ejection positions shown).
Regarding claim 14, Sudo teaches wherein the carriage is scanned for each position in the conveyance direction of the medium ([0107], see fig. 10).
Regarding claim 15, Sudo teaches wherein the amount of liquid ejected by adjacent nozzle PX1 is changed based on a mask (see claim 11 rejection).
Regarding claim 16, Sudo teaches wherein the masks correspond to different print densities ([0107], note that each mask necessarily corresponds to a different print density).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. New claims have been submitted, but these claims do not overcome the standing prior art rejection. The rejections above address all limitations. The standing prior art rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853