DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Claim rejections based on prior art
Applicant’s arguments filed on 08/05/2026 with respect to claims 1-9 and 11-13 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Page 7 of Applicant’s remarks disclose “Hayashi does not disclose any motor”. With respect ‘motor’, an actual motor is not claimed. The claims are actually directed to a ‘motor drive’, which Examiner equated to printer 1 of Hayashi.
With respect to claim limitation “when power is not being provided to the motor drive from the connected power source and when the external device is of a second type”, see col. 19, lines 33-46 of Hayashi, which discloses “according to this configuration, the AC supply monitoring circuit 36 monitors the supply of electric power from the AC power supply, and when the AC supply monitoring circuit 36 detects an electric power abnormality, the swap request is notified to the external device 61, so that it is possible to swap an electric power source and an electric power sink. When the power supply cord is unplugged from the AC outlet and electric power cannot be thus received or when an abnormality of the AC power supply occurs and overcurrent or overvoltage is thus generated, i.e., when electric power cannot be secured from the AC port, the external device 61 is requested to be an electric power source, so that electric power can be received from the external device 61”. Note, as discloses in col. 19, lines 33-46, the external device providing power to the printer equates to the external device being a ‘second type’. Claim language “when power is not being provided to the motor drive from the connected power source” is being equated “when the power supply cord is unplugged from the AC outlet and electric power cannot be thus received”, from col. 19, lines 33-46. Also important to note, a specific order, sequence or a specific process, way of determination is not claimed. In other words, Hayashi discloses the function, result of a determination type(s).
Page 9 of Applicant’s remarks disclose “Finally, Hayashi fails to disclose that "the motor drive receives power from the external device to enable programming of the motor drive by the external device when power is not being provided to the motor drive from the connected power source and when the external device is of a second type," as recited in claim 1”. Note, external devices 61 communicating to printer 1 is being equated to external devices 61 ‘programing’ the printer 1. See col. 3, lines 20-24 of Hayashi, which discloses “the printer 1 prints image data of a print job received from a PC, a smartphone or the like via wired communication or wireless communication on a predetermined sheet”.
With respect to claim 8, Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of new interpretation of the reference due to newly amended claim 8.
REJECTIONS BASED ON PRIOR ART
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
1. Claims 1-6, 8, 9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayashi et al. (US pat. 11,750,015), hereinafter, “Hayashi”.
At the outset, Applicant is reminded that claims subject to examination will be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023,1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). With this in mind, the discussion will focus on how the terms and relationships between the terms in the claims are met by the references.
2. As per claim 1, Hayashi discloses a motor drive (portable printer 1 of fig. 1) configured to be connected to an external device (external device 61), the motor drive comprising: an outer housing (see fig. 1); a power module (power supply unit 27) housed within the outer housing that controls application of power from a connected power source to a connected motor (image forming unit 16; see col. 5, lines 54, which discloses “the power supply unit 27 functions as a power supply for each unit in the printer 1 to supply electric power to each unit”); a control module (electric power controller 25) housed within the outer housing and in communication with the power module (see col. 5, lines 46-51, which discloses “The electric power controller 25 includes a processing circuit such as a CPU, and executes the program PG in the processing circuit, thereby controlling the power supply unit 27”); and a communications port (USB connection unit 19) disposed on the outer housing and in communication with the control module (see col. 5, lines 12-35), the communications port supporting dual-role power in which, when connected to the external device, the control module is to determine (‘to decide’, as discloses in col. 5, lines 1-19) a type of the external device and, based on the determined type (see col. 5, lines 1-19, which teaches the function/result of voltage source or voltage sink determination by controller 25; for example, col. 5, lines 1-19 discloses “the electric power controller 25 controls supply and reception of electric power, and transmission and reception of data via the USB connection unit 19. The electric power controller 25 decides an electric power role, based on a connection state of the CC signal line (a potential of the CC signal line, and the like) at the time when an external device is connected to the receptacle 51, and to execute negotiation of electric power transfer. As used herein, the negotiation is processing of setting an electric power source or an electric power sink, setting electric power transfer, and the like, for example”): the motor drive powers the external device when the external device is of a first type (see col. 18, line 61 to col. 19, line 6, which discloses the external device receiving power from the printer, which equates to the external device being a ‘first type’), and the motor drive receives power from the external device to enable programming of the motor drive by the external device when power is not being provided to the motor drive from the connected power source and when the external device is of a second type (see col. 19, lines 33-46, which discloses “according to this configuration, the AC supply monitoring circuit 36 monitors the supply of electric power from the AC power supply, and when the AC supply monitoring circuit 36 detects an electric power abnormality, the swap request is notified to the external device 61, so that it is possible to swap an electric power source and an electric power sink. When the power supply cord is unplugged from the AC outlet and electric power cannot be thus received or when an abnormality of the AC power supply occurs and overcurrent or overvoltage is thus generated, i.e., when electric power cannot be secured from the AC port, the external device 61 is requested to be an electric power source, so that electric power can be received from the external device 61”. Note, as discloses in col. 19, lines 33-46, the external device providing power to the printer equates to the external device being a ‘second type’. Claim language “when power is not being provided to the motor drive from the connected power source” is being equated “when the power supply cord is unplugged from the AC outlet and electric power cannot be thus received”, from col. 19, lines 33-46).
3. As per claim 2, Hayashi discloses “The motor drive of claim 1” [See rejection to claim 11 above], wherein the communications port supports dual-role data flow in which the motor drive controls data transmission to the external device when the external device is of the first type and the motor drive allows the external device to control data transmission when the external device is of the second type (see claim 1 of Hayashi).
4. As per claim 3, Hayashi discloses wherein the communications port is a USB port (see col. 4, lines 39-43).
5. As per claim 4, Hayashi discloses wherein the communications port is a USB 3.1, Type-C port (see col. 4, lines 39-43).
6. As per claim 5, Hayashi discloses wherein the first type includes at least one USB device chosen from a human interface module (see col. 4, lines 35-41) and a wireless USB dongle.
7. As per claim 6, Hayashi discloses wherein the second type includes at least one USB host chosen from a personal computer, a tablet, and a laptop (see col. 4, lines 35-41).
8. As per claim 8, Hayashi discloses a motor drive system, the motor drive system comprising: a motor drive (portable printer 1 of fig. 1) comprising: an outer housing (see fig. 1), a power module (power supply unit 27) housed within the outer housing (see fig. 1), a control module (electric power controller 25) housed within the outer housing and in communication with the power module (see col. 5, lines 46-51, which discloses “The electric power controller 25 includes a processing circuit such as a CPU, and executes the program PG in the processing circuit, thereby controlling the power supply unit 27”), and a USB port (USB connection unit 19) disposed on the outer housing and in communication with the control module (see col. 5, lines 12-35); and a human interface module (external device 61) removably coupled to the motor drive via the USB port (see fig. 1), the human interface module comprising a display, an input structure (a display and keypad of a laptop; see col. 4, lines 34-41, which discloses “in FIG. 1, as an example, one external device 61 is connected to one receptacle 51. As the external device, for example, a variety of devices that can connect based on USB standards, such as a smartphone, a personal computer, a laptop PC, a printer, an external hard disk, a USB memory, a card reader, and the like may be adopted. In the meantime, the USB connection unit 19 may include a plurality of the receptacles 51”), and a module housing separate from the outer housing of the motor drive (see fig. 1 and col. 4, lines 34-41, which teach an external device such as a laptop, enclosed within a housing, is attached to the printer via a USP port), wherein the outer housing of the motor drive includes a receptacle (a combination of an inserted USB plug, connector of an external device and receptacle 51) separate from the USB port (a USB plug, connector of an external device, part of the combination, becomes, is separated from a port of receptacle 51 when it’s unplugged, removed. Just for example, see fig. 1 of US 2018/0284865 to Shimamura), the receptacle holding or supporting (to enable communication) the human interface module when the human interface module is coupled to the motor drive via the USB port (see fig. 1 and col. 4, lines 34-56).
9. As per claim 9, Hayashi discloses wherein the human interface module includes a plug that directly connects to the USB port of the motor drive (see fig. 1 and col. 4, lines 34-56).
10. As per claim 11, Hayashi discloses wherein the human interface module includes a port and is coupled to the motor drive via a USB connector cable that plugs into both the USB port of the motor drive and into the port of the human interface module (see col. 4, lines 34-56).
11. As per claim 12, Hayashi discloses wherein the USB port supports dual-role power flow in which: the motor drive powers the human interface module when the human interface module is coupled to the motor drive, and a personal computer powers the motor drive when the personal computer is coupled to the motor drive via the USB port (see claim 1 of Hayashi).
12. As per claim 13, Hayashi discloses wherein the USB port supports dual-role data flow in which: the motor drive controls data transmission between the motor drive and the human interface module when the human interface module is coupled to the motor drive, and a personal computer controls data transmission between the motor drive and the personal computer when the personal computer is coupled to the motor drive via the USB port (see claim 1 of Hayashi).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
14. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hayashi et al. (US pat. 11,750,015), hereinafter, “Hayashi”, in view of Shimamura et al. (US pub. # 2020/0209933), hereinafter, “Shimamura”.
15. As per claim 7, Hayashi discloses “The motor drive of claim 1” [See rejection to claim 11 above], but fails to expressly discloses wherein the control module is configured to: detect when the external device is connected, and determine whether the external device is of the first type or the second type based on whether a configuration channel pin of the communications port is pulled up or pulled down.
Shimamura discloses wherein the control module is configured to: detect when the external device is connected, and determine whether the external device is of the first type or the second type based on whether a configuration channel pin of the communications port is pulled up or pulled down [see paragraph 0035, which discloses “the switch 63 switches between a state where the CC pin and the pull-up resistor Ru are connected (a pull-up state) and a state where the CC pin and the pull-down resistor Rd are connected (a pull-down state). For example, when an external apparatus is connected to the receptacle 51 and it is detected that the potential of the CC pin (one of CC1 and CC2 that functions as CC) is a potential of the pull-up state, the power controller 25 causes the receptacle 51 to function as the power source. The power controller 25 performs negotiation of setting of the amount of power to be supplied and so on, for supplying power through the Vbus pin of the receptacle 51. Similarly, when an external apparatus is connected to the receptacle 51 and it is detected that the potential of the CC pin is a potential of the pull-down state, the power controller 25 causes the receptacle 51 to function as the power sink”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate Shimamura’s teaching of a controller determining whether a power role switch being a switch of a power role between a power source of supplying power and a power sink of receiving power, into Hayashi’s teaching of an information processing apparatus that enables to continuously perform communication with a device when stopping supply of electric power due to an electric power abnormality occurring in the apparatus being an electric power source, for the ability/benefit of having a printer that includes interfaces to perform power delivery that’s compatible with USB PD standard and wherein an amount of power delivery fluctuates due to power role switch.
CLOSING COMMENTS
Conclusion
a. STATUS OF CLAIMS IN THE APPLICATION
The following is a summary of the treatment and status of all claims in the application as recommended by M.P.E.P. 707.07(i):
a(1) CLAIMS REJECTED IN THE APPLICATION
Per the instant office action, claims 1-9 and 11-13 have received a final action on the merits.
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 extension fee 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.
b. DIRECTION OF FUTURE CORRESPONDENCES
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ernest Unelus whose telephone number is (571) 272-8596. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
IMPORTANT NOTE
If attempts to reach the above noted Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Mr. Idriss Alrobaye, can be reached at the following telephone number: Area Code (571) 270-1023.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Ernest Unelus/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2181
