DETAILED ACTION
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, 3, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebihara (2014/0146108) in view of Kohno et al. (2004/0032613) and Hong (2003/0168543).
Regarding claim 1, Ebihara teaches a processing apparatus comprising:
a carriage (fig. 2, item 5);
a carriage mover (fig. 3, item 6) including a motor (fig. 3, item 6) to move the carriage;
a motor controller (fig. 11, item 503) to control the motor;
a power supply (note that there is necessarily a power supply) to apply a second voltage to the motor controller, the second voltage being a normal carriage speed operating voltage ([0092]-[0093], note that a second voltage is necessarily applied before the access cover is opened); and
a transmitter (fig. 11, item 351) to transmit a control signal (fig. 13, S105) for movement of the carriage after a predetermined delay time has elapsed (fig. 13, S107) from when a predetermined control condition is satisfied (fig. 13, S104) while the second voltage is applied to the motor controller and the carriage moves (see fig. 13, note that the routine is started when the carriage moves at normal operating speed);
a housing (fig. 1, item 101) to house the carriage;
a cover (fig. 1, item 104) of the housing that is configured to be openable and closable; and
a brake ([0092]), wherein
the second voltage is a voltage enabling the motor controller to move the carriage at a second speed by the motor, ([0092], standard speed); and
the predetermined control condition includes at least one condition among that the cover is opened (fig. 13, S104, [0090], note that the microswitch being turned off indicates the cover being open) and that an abnormality of the processing apparatus is detected;
wherein the transmitter includes a delay circuit (fig. 13, S107, [0096], note that there is necessarily such a circuit) to transmit the control signal after a predetermined delay time has elapsed from when the predetermined control condition is satisfied (see fig. 13, note that the delay time takes places at S107, and the control signal takes place at S105 only after the delay time is over).
Ebihara teaches wherein the carriage is totally stopped when the cover is detected as open. Ebihara does not teach only reducing a speed of the carriage when the cover is detected as open. Kohno teaches this. Kohno teaches a first voltage (Kohno, fig. 4, voltage corresponding to first speed v1) that is a voltage enabling the motor controller to move the carriage at a first speed by the motor (see fig. 1), wherein a second speed is greater than the first speed (Kohno, see fig. 4, note that second speed v2 is greater than first speed v1, and the carriage is moved at the faster, second speed when the cover is closed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to reduce the speed of the carriage when the cover was open, as disclosed by Kohno, instead of totally stopping the carriage when the cover was open, as disclosed by Ebihara, because doing so would allow for continuation of standard printer functioning when the cover was open instead of requiring printer functioning to come to a halt, and this would result in increased throughput.
Upon combination of the references, Ebihara’s S105 would instead be a reduction in carriage speed/voltage applied to the carriage motor to the first voltage, and the power supply would operable to apply the first voltage to the motor controller after the predetermined delay time ends at S107.
Ebihara in view of Kohno does not teach the brake controls the motor controller and decelerates the carriage during
Examiner acknowledges that Hong is directed to a capstan roller for winding a tape cassette, not a printer, as disclosed by Ebihara in view of Kohno. Nonetheless, Examiner maintains Hong’s braking technique would have been obvious to apply to any motor transitioning from a faster speed to a slower speed.
Regarding claim 3, Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches the processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the housing includes the cover and the transmitter includes a detector (Ebihara, fig. 13, S104, microswitch) to detect an opening/closing state of the cover, and when the detector detects that the over is opened, the transmitter transmits the control signal (Ebihara, [0090]).
Regarding claim 10, Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches the processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the power supply applies the second voltage to the motor controller during the predetermined delay time (Ebihara, see fig. 13).
Regarding claim 11, Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches the processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing apparatus is configured or programmed to control the motor controller to cause the carriage to be able to move at the first speed after the predetermined delay time ends (see claim 1 rejection).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Arakane et al. (2022/0242126)
Regarding claim 2, Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches the processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising:
an ink head (Ebihara, fig. 3, item 11) held by the carriage;
a cleaner (Ebihara, fig. 3, item 30) to clean the ink head in a state where the carriage is moved to a predetermined cleaning position (Ebihara, see fig. 3); and
a mode setter to switch a mode between a low-speed mode and a high-speed mode (note that there is necessarily a mode setter). Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong does not teach
the low-speed mode including a cleaning mode in which the cleaner cleans the ink head, the high-speed mode including a printing mode; wherein
the power supply is operable to apply the first voltage to the motor controller in the low-speed mode, and to apply the second voltage to the motor controller in a state where the control signal is not transmitted in the high-speed mode. Arakane teaches this (Arakane, see fig. 1, Note that the carriage is necessarily in the low-speed mode when it faces cap 70 because it is either stopped or reversing direction. See fig. 6, S55, note that the carriage prints in the high-speed mode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to add a low-speed cleaning mode of the type disclosed by Arakane to the device of Ebihara in view of Kohno because doing so would amount to applying a known technique to a known device in need of improvement to obtain predictable results.
Claim(s) 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takano et al. (4,883,944).
Regarding claim 4, Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches the processing apparatus according to claim 1. Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong does not teach first and second power supplies and a relay. Takano teaches wherein a power supply includes
a first power supply (Takano, fig. 2, item 15) to generate the first voltage (Takano, fig. 2, item 15);
a second power supply (Takano, fig. 2, item 14) to generate the second voltage; and
a relay (Takano, fig. 2, item Ry3) including a coil (Takano, fig. 2, note relay Ry3 is being taken to be the coil), the relay being operable to connect the second power supply to a load controller while the coil is energized (Takano, fig. 2), and to connect the first power supply to the load controller while the coil is not energized (Takano, see fig. 4, Note that only one of the first and second power supplies is connected to the heater at a given time); and
the transmitter includes:
a third power supply (Takano, fig. 2, Vss) to enable excitation of the coil (Takano, see fig. 2); and
a control circuit interposed between the third power supply and the coil to be shut off when the predetermined control condition is satisfied (Takano, fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the power supply scheme disclosed by Takano with the printer device disclosed by Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong because doing so would amount to combining a known power supply scheme with a known device to obtain predictable results. In other words, while Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches driving a load with high and low voltages depending on setting, it does not detail specifics of the circuitry required to drive the load, and thus it would have been obvious to look to Takano for such a teaching. Upon combination, the power supply scheme of Takano would be applied to Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong’s motor (not a heater, obviously).
Regarding claim 7, Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches the processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the delay circuit includes a capacitor to be charged while the control circuit is connected, and to discharge to the coil when the control circuit is disconnected.
does not teach wherein the power supply includes:
a first power supply to generate the first voltage;
a second power supply to generate the second voltage; and
a relay including a coil and operable to connect the second power supply to the motor controller while the coil is energized, and to connect the first power supply to the motor controller while the coil is not energized;
the transmitter includes:
a third power supply to enable excitation of the coil; and
a control circuit interposed between the third power supply and the coil to be shut off when the predetermined control condition is satisfied. Takano teaches this (see claim 4 rejection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the power supply scheme disclosed by Takano with the printer device disclosed by Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong because doing so would amount to combining a known power supply scheme with a known device to obtain predictable results. In other words, while Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong teaches driving a load with high and low voltages depending on setting, it does not detail specifics of the circuitry required to drive the load, and thus it would have been obvious to look to Takano for such a teaching. Upon combination, the power supply scheme of Takano would be applied to Ebihara in view of Kohno and Hong’s motor (not a heater, obviously).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
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