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, 7, 8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka et al. (2013/0083334) in view of Kanamitsu (2022/0011990).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Kataoka teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus and method comprising:
a recording unit in which a plurality of nozzles to apply ink is arrayed ([0006], [0029], [0050], note that inkjet printers necessarily have nozzles);
a scanning unit configured to perform relative scanning with the recording unit on a recording medium (note that such a scanning unit is necessarily present in any kind of printer as the medium needs to be moved relative to the print head);
one or more processors (fig. 2, item 1); and
one or more memories (fig. 2, item 102) coupled to the processors and storing instructions that, when executed by the processors, cause the processors to function as:
an acquisition unit (fig. 2, item 106) configured to acquire input image data (fig. 8) that includes a bar code including a plurality of black bars (fig. 25(A), note filled bars) and a plurality of white bars (fig. 8), wherein each black bar of the plurality of black bars and each white bar of the plurality of white bars has a respective length in a first direction that is greater than a respective length in a second direction crossing the first direction (see fig. 8, note that the image has the same proportions as the bar codes of the figures of the immediate application); and
a determination unit configured to determine, based on the respective lengths of the plurality of white bars in the second direction (see fig. 8), an amount of ink to be applied by the plurality of nozzles to a black bar adjacent to a corresponding white bar in the second direction (see fig. 8),
wherein, in a case where a length in the second direction of a first white bar both an amount of ink to be applied on one side, and an amount of ink to be applied per unit area of a second edge region of a black bar on another side adjacent to the first white bar, as a first amount of ink (see fig. 8), and
wherein, in a case where a respective length in the second direction of a second white bar both an amount of ink to be applied on one side, and an amount of ink to be applied per unit area of a fourth edge region of a black bar on another side adjacent to the second white bar, as a second amount of ink that is smaller than the first amount of ink (see fig. 8, [0050]-[0051], Note that before thinning the black bars, the white bar between the black bars has a smaller length and is printed at a lower resolution, i.e., a lower amount of ink per unit area, and when the black bars are thinned, the white bar grows in length, and the resolution of the black bars is increased, i.e., the ink amount per unit area of the black bars is increased. As such, dividing any of the unthinned black or thinned black bars into thirds with a center, non-edge portion and two edge portions, the limitations are met. That is, the amount of ink per unit area of edge portions for black bars sandwiching longer white bars is more than the amount of ink per unit area of edge portions for black bars sandwiching white bars with smaller lengths).
Kataoka does not expressly teach wherein the bar code is configured to be read by reading reflectance data of the black bars and white bars aligned in the second direction. Kanamitsu teaches this (Kanamitsu, [0029]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use a reflectance reader, as disclosed by Kanamitsu, to read the barcode disclosed by Kataoka because doing so would amount to using a known barcode reader to read a barcode.
Regarding claim 7, Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processors, further cause the processors to function as a detection unit (Kanamitsu, [0029]) configured to detect the bar code from the input image data (Kanamitsu, [0029]).
Regarding claim 8, Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein regions of the plurality of white bars are formed by application of ink by the plurality of nozzles (Kataoka, fig. 8, Note that the white bars are created only by application of black ink so that the absence of black ink creates the white bars).
Regarding claim 11, Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquired input image data is generated by converting a predetermined character string into the bar code including the black bars and the white bars by using a bar code font (Kanamitsu, [0028], [0039], [0041]).
Claim(s) 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Usui (2021/0150292).
Regarding claim 3, Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1. Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu does not teach wherein image density at the edge regions of the black bars is less than image density toward the centers of the black bars. Usui teaches this (Usui, see fig. 3, see edge areas). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the black bars disclosed by Kobayashi instead of those disclosed by Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu because doing so would allow for the prevention of image blurring.
Regarding claim 4, Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1. Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu does not teach wherein image density at the edge regions of the black bars is less than image density toward the centers of the black bars. Usui teaches this (Usui, see fig. 3, see edge areas). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the black bars disclosed by Kobayashi instead of those disclosed by Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu because doing so would allow for the prevention of image blurring.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka in view of Kanamitsu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shimomura et al. (2014/0009528).
Regarding claim 9, Kataoka in view of Kobayashi and Kanamitsu teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1. Kataoka in view of Kobayashi and Kanamitsu does not teach wherein regions of the plurality of black bars are formed by application of ink of a color other than black. Shimomura teaches this (Shimomura, see fig. 11, Note that both black Dk and cyan Dc are used to print black bars). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to print the black bars of a bar code with more than one color, as disclosed by Shimomura, in the device disclosed by Kataoka in view of Kobayashi because doing so would allow for even usage of multiple colors of printing ink, thereby reducing the frequency with which new ink would need to be supplied to the printer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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, 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