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, 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (6,457,802) in view of official notice.
Regarding claim 1, Cai teaches a liquid discharging apparatus, comprising:
a head (fig. 2, item 44) having nozzles (fig. 2, note that head necessarily has nozzles), the head being configured to discharge liquid through the nozzles (see fig. 1);
a reservoir section (fig. 2, item 40/42), having:
a liquid reservoir chamber (fig. 2, item 42) configured to store the liquid (see fig. 2); and
a communication opening (fig. 2, item 76) connecting inside to an atmosphere outside the reservoir section through an air portion (fig. 2, all portions of chamber 42 above liquid and not filled with liquid) in the reservoir section, a volume Vb of the air portion changing in accordance with an amount of the liquid stored in the liquid reservoir chamber (see fig. 2, note that, as defined above, this is the case), the reservoir section being mounted on the head (see fig. 2), wherein the reservoir section and the head are mounted to a carriage for reciprocal movement (see fig. 1),
a liquid flow path (fig. 1, flow path between head 44 and chamber 42) connecting the head and the liquid reservoir chamber for the liquid to flow therein (see fig. 2);
a switching assembly (fig. 2, item 36/82/80) configured to switch states of the communication opening between a open state, in which the inside and the outside of the liquid reservoir chamber are connected, and a closed state, in which the inside and the outside of the liquid reservoir chamber are disconnected (col. 3, lines 5-37); and
a controller configured to:
control the switching assembly in a disconnecting process to switch the states of the communication opening from the open state to the closed state (col. 3, lines 5-37, note that the states are changed from open to closed when the carriage moves from the servicing position to the printing position in between scans); and
control the head in a discharging process to discharge the liquid through the nozzles after the disconnecting process (col. 2, lines 24-28, col. 3, lines 5-37, note that printing occurs with the opening closed and after a disconnecting process),
determine whether a connection condition is satisfied for switching the states of the communication opening from the closed state to the open state, while in a closed state and between discharging processes (col. 3, lines 5-37, note that when a one print job is completed and before another has started, i.e., between discharging processes, the opening is opened. Note that the connection condition is being taken to be that a print job has been completed and the carriage is ready to move to the servicing position),
in response to determining that the connection condition is satisfied, control the switching assembly to switch the states of the communication opening from the closed state to the open state (col. 3, lines 5-37, note that when a one print job is completed and before another has started, i.e., between discharging processes, the opening is opened. Note that the connection condition is being taken to be that a print job has been completed and the carriage is ready to move to the servicing position),
wherein the controller is configured to, after the states of the communication opening is switched from the closed state to the open state based on the determination that the connection condition is satisfied, control the switching assembly to switch the states of the communication opening from the open state to the closed state (col. 3, lines 5-37, note that when the next print job is received, the carriage moves away from stopper 36, thereby disconnecting the valve),
wherein the liquid reservoir chamber is not refilled with the liquid during an entire period when the communication opening is in the open state based on the determination that the connection condition is satisfied (col. 3, lines 5-37).
While Cai does not expressly teach wherein a volume Vb of the air portion is set to satisfy formulas (1) and (2):
Vb= (Po+ΔP)* ΔV/ΔP...(1); and
ΔP≤Po
wherein Po represents one atmosphere,
wherein ΔV represents a change in the volume of the air portion due to a change in a volume of the liquid caused by discharging a predetermined amount of the liquid in the discharging process,
wherein ΔP represents a change in pressure of the air portion according to the change in the volume of the liquid in the discharging process, and
wherein Pm represents a pressure resistance of menisci formed with the liquid in the nozzles,
Examiner maintains that all specific volumes and pressures are inherent within Cai. That is, if the limitations directed to specific volumes and pressures were not inherent within Cai, Cai’s device would not be functional. Further, the meniscus limitation is necessarily met because if it wasn’t met, either the nozzles would leak or the menisci would break resulting in unstable ejection, both of these rendering Cai’s device inoperable.
While Cai does not expressly teach determining whether the connection condition is satisfied between discharging processes for a same sheet, Examiner takes official notice that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have found it obvious to expel air from accumulated bubbles any number of times, including multiple times during a single sheet passage.
Regarding claim 2, Cai in view of official notice teaches the liquid discharging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein ΔV represents the change in the volume of the air portion due to the change in the volume of the liquid caused by discharging the predetermined amount of the liquid in the discharging process to record a specific image on a sheet under a specific condition (Note that any printing requires doing so with a specific image under a multitude of “specific conditions”).
Regarding claim 5, Cai in view of official notice teaches the teaches the liquid discharging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the connection condition is a duration of the discharging process reaching a predetermined time (cols. 6-7, lines 56-21). Cai in view of official notice does not specifically teach wherein the predetermined time is 30 seconds. However, according to MPEP 2144.05, where the general conditions of a claim are present in the prior art, it is not inventive to optimize those conditions through routine experimentation. Here, while Cai does not expressly give a number of seconds, all other conditions of claimed invention are present in the art, and thus to claim a specific time threshold is not inventive.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai in view of official notice as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Teramoto et al. (2018/0265722).
Regarding claim 3, Cai in view of official notice teaches the liquid discharging apparatus according to claim 2. Cai in view of official notice does not teach wherein the specific image is a pattern image defined by the International Organization for Standardization, and wherein the specific condition is recording the pattern image continuously for a specific length of time. Teramoto teaches this (Teramoto, [0114]-[0120], Note that the pattern is printed once every ten sheets for predetermined ranges of numbers of sheets, each range having a specific length of time associated with it). It would have been obvious to use the test chart disclosed by Teramoto as a diagnostic of ink nozzle health and color fastness in the device disclose by Cai in view of official notice because doing so would amount to combining a prior art maintenance technique with a prior art printer structure to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claim 4, Cai in view of official notice and Teramoto teaches liquid discharging apparatus according to claim 3,
wherein the specific length of time is 30 seconds (Teramoto, [0114]-[0120], note that one could simply select whatever number of sheets has been printed by Teramoto’s process when 30 seconds have passed. That is, the claim does not require that the printing stop at 30 seconds, but even if it did, see below),
wherein the pattern image is a multicolor pattern image (Teramoto, [0120]),
wherein the specific condition is recording the pattern image continuously for 30 seconds in a standard mode defined by the International Organization for Standardization on the sheet in A4-size (Teramoto, [0114]).
Further, it should be noted that MPEP 2144.05 states that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Here, Teramoto discloses printing the same pattern under the standard conditions known in the art. Applicant has claimed an amount of time required to print the pattern, but claiming such a time is just an optimization of the general conditions in the art and thus, the claimed time is not patentable. It is also worth noting that it is unclear whether the time limitations actually has any practical effect on the process.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) q have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 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, RICARDO MAGALLANES can be reached at 571-202-5960. 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
Prosecution Insights