DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1 and 16 are 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 “the reversing path [returns] a print medium…which has been reversed front to back…” However, it would seem the sides of the print medium are only reversed in relation to the nozzle surface, and the reversing would not seem occur until the unprinted side of the print medium faces the nozzle surface. That is, while the intention of the claimed language is understood, what constitutes “reversing” of the print medium has not been specifically defined. Clarification is required.
Because all other claims depend from claims 1 and 16, they are also rejected on this basis.
Claim 29 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 spur to contact the print medium, but to that point in the claims, “a print medium,” “a first print medium” and “a second print medium have been recited, and thus it is not clear as to which of the three recited print media claim 29 refers.
Because claim 30 depends from claim 29, it is also rejected on this basis.
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, 6, 12-18, 21, 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yatsunami et al. (2021/0331498) in view of Kuno (2021/0286297).
Regarding claims 1, 16 and 28, Yatsunami teaches the printing apparatus and method comprising:
a supply unit (fig. 2, item 11/12) configured to supply a print medium;
an intermediate roller (fig. 2, item 21) configured to transport the print medium supplied by the supply unit;
a transport roller (fig. 2, item 16) configured to transport, in a transport direction, the print medium transported by the intermediate roller (see fig. 2);
a sensor (fig. 6, item 71), provided between the intermediate roller and the transport roller, configured to sense an end part of the print medium ([0086]);
a inkjet printing unit (fig. 2, item 9) configured to print an image on the print medium transported by the transport roller, downstream from the transport roller in the transport direction (see fig. 2);
a carriage (fig. 2, item 8) configured to mount the printing head and to move in a direction (fig. 2, X direction) that intersects the transport direction;
a reversing roller (fig. 2, item 47) provided downstream of the printing head in he transport direction (see fig. 2) and configured to transport the print medium in the transport direction by rotating in a first direction and in a reversing direction by rotating in a second direction opposite to the first direction (see fig. 7),
a reversing path (fig. 2, item SR) configured to return, from the reversing roller to the intermediate roller, the print medium, a first surface of which has been printed onto by the printing unit and which has been reversed front to back (see figs. 5, 6); and
a control unit (fig. 3, item 60) configured to supply a first print medium by the supply unit and a second print medium, after the first print medium, by the supply unit,
wherein the control unit performs
a first control for causing the second print medium from the supply unit to overlap a following end part of the first print medium, the first surface of the first print medium being printed onto by the printing unit, between the intermediate roller and the transport roller (see fig. 6, note that all sheets transported by the intermediate roller can overlap sheets that are being printed at the time), and
a second control for causing the first print medium transported from the reversing path to overlap a following end part of the second print medium after the first control (see figs. 5, 6, note that the first and second control precede and follow each other), a first surface of
wherein in the second control, the control unit the first print medium through the reversing path and controls the intermediate roller so as to cause the first print medium to catch up to the following end part of the second print medium (see figs. 5, 6, Note that the first print medium P2 is reversed and fed through the reverse path until it overlaps the end portion of the second print medium).
Yatsunami does not teach wherein in the second control sets a transport speed of the intermediate roller to change from a first speed to a second speed higher than the first speed of the transport roller for the second print medium while the second print medium is being printed by the printing head. Kuno teaches wherein a sheet being printed is transported at a low velocity while a sheet being fed along a reverse path to have its second side printed is transported at a high velocity (Kuno, [0146]-[0147], see figs. 14-20. Note that the speed of all of the rollers in the reversing path, including the intermediate roller, would be higher than the speed of the transport roller until the time when the sheet overlap is at a maximum, as shown in Yatsunami, fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to feed a sheet in a reverse path at a speed higher than a regular feeding speed because doing so would ensure that the sheet being reversed would arrive at the printing area at the moment or before the previous sheet had been finished being printed, thereby ensuring maximum throughput.
Upon applying the sheet speed scheme of Kuno to Yatsunami, all of Yatsunami’s rollers in the reverse path, including intermediate roller 21 and reversing roller 46, would be operated at increased speed so that the reversed first print medium would catch up to and overlap the second print medium at the increased speed while the second print medium was being printed. Thus, with the sensor detecting a leading end part of the first print medium, the transport speed of the intermediate roller would be set back to the first speed while the first print medium was in the reversing path until the sensor detects the leading end part of the first print medium. That is, the intermediate and reversing rollers would both speed up to feed the first print medium through the reversing path to catch up to the second print medium, and then the intermediate roller would slow back down so as not to cause a paper jam between the leading edge of the reversed print medium and the trailing edge of the second print medium.
Regarding claim 27, note that this is how Yatsunami necessarily works.
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 16, further comprising:
a discharge path (Yatsunami, fig. 2, path through rollers 46), located downstream from the printing unit in the transport direction, for discharging the print medium onto which an image has been printed (Yatsunami, see fig. 2),
wherein a reversing roller (Yatsunami, fig. 2, item 47) is disposed in the discharge path, the reversing roller discharging the print medium by rotating in a first direction and transporting the print medium printed onto by the printing unit to the reversing path by rotating in a second direction
Regarding claims 3 and 18, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 16, further comprising: a guide part (Yatsunami, fig. 2, item 22) disposed between the intermediate roller and the transport roller, wherein the intermediate roller transports the print medium from the reversing path to the guide part (Yatsunami, see fig. 2).
Regarding claims 6 and 21, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 16, wherein the control unit determines whether to perform control for causing the second print medium to overlap a following end part of the first print medium based on print data (Yatsunami, Note that all conveyance of any print media is done “based on print data”).
Regarding claim 12, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the control unit causes the second print medium to catch up to the first print medium by setting a transport speed of the intermediate roller transporting the second print medium to a speed higher than a speed of the transport roller in a state where the first print medium is being transported by the transport roller (Yatsunami, see fig. 6, Note that the intermediate roller is driven while the transport roller is idle, at least momentarily).
Regarding claim 13, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the control unit cancels a state of overlap between a following end part of the first print medium and a leading end part of the second print medium by setting a transport speed of the reversing roller in the first direction to a speed higher than a speed of the transport roller transporting the second print medium being printed onto by the printing unit (Yatsunami, see fig. 6, Note that this is necessarily how the device works).
Regarding claim 14, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the control unit detects a leading end position of the second print medium before a printing operation for a final line is performed on the first print medium by the printing unit (Yatsunami, see fig. 6, Note that this is the case).
Regarding claim 15, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when a determination is made to skip control for causing a leading end part of the second print medium to overlap a following end part of the first print medium, the control unit transports the first print medium to a position opposite the printing unit in a state where transport of the second print medium is stopped (Yatsunami, Note that printing a single page results in the claimed control).
Regarding claim 29, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a spur (Yatsunami, fig. 2, item 42) provided between the printing head and the reversing roller and configured to contact the print medium (Yatsunami, [0061]).
Regarding claim 30, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 29, after following end part of the first print medium has passed the spur, the overlap between the first print medium and the second print medium caused by the first control is canceled by increasing a rotating speed of the reversing roller in the first direction (Note that, upon combination of the references, this is the case. That is, while the first print medium is moved downstream past the spur after being printed, and the second print medium begins being printed, the reversing roller speeds up to feed the first print medium through the reversing path to overlap the following end of the second print medium.
Claim(s) 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yatsunami in view of Kuno as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Taniguchi (2020/0024092).
Regarding claims 5 and 20, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 16. Yatsunami in view of Kuno does not teach wherein the control unit executes a skew correction operation of bringing the second print medium transported from the reversing path into contact with the transport roller while the transport roller is stopped. Taniguchi teaches this (Taniguchi, [0052], see fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to apply the skew correction technique disclosed by Taniguchi to the device disclosed by Yatsunami in view of Kuno because doing so would allow for correction of unwanted media skew.
Claim(s) 7-11 and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno as applied to claims 6 and 21 above, and further in view of Yatsunami (2017/0282609).
Regarding claims 7 and 22, Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 6 and 21. Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno does not teach wherein the print data is a print density in a pre-set printing area. Yatsunami ‘609 teaches this (Yatsunami ‘609, [0284]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the overlap determining technique disclosed by Yatsunami ‘609 to the device disclosed by Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno because doing so would allow for determination of an amount of ink deposited on a trailing edge of a first sheet to thereby determine whether such overlapping would result in smearing and facilitating cancelation of overlapping if such smearing was predicted.
Regarding claims 8 and 23, Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 7 and 22. Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno does not teach wherein the control unit determines whether to perform control for causing the second print medium to overlap the following end part of the first print medium based on print data in the pre-set area in which the first print medium and the second print medium overlap each other. Yatsunami ‘609 teaches this (Yatsunami ‘609, [0284]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the overlap determining technique disclosed by Yatsunami ‘609 to the device disclosed by Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno because doing so would allow for determination of an amount of ink deposited on a trailing edge of a first sheet to thereby determine whether such overlapping would result in smearing and facilitating cancelation of overlapping if such smearing was predicted.
Regarding claims 9 and 24, Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 7 and 22. Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno does not teach wherein the control unit determines whether to perform control for causing the second print medium to overlap the following end part of the first print medium by comparing the print density in the pre-set area with a pre-set print density. Yatsunami ‘609 teaches this (Yatsunami ‘609, [0284]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the overlap determining technique disclosed by Yatsunami ‘609 to the device disclosed by Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno because doing so would allow for determination of an amount of ink deposited on a trailing edge of a first sheet to thereby determine whether such overlapping would result in smearing and facilitating cancelation of overlapping if such smearing was predicted.
Regarding claims 10 and 25, Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus and method according to claims 9 and 24. Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno does not teach wherein the control unit determines to perform control for causing the second print medium to overlap the following end part of the first print medium when the print density in the pre-set area is no greater than the pre-set print density. Yatsunami ‘609 teaches this (Yatsunami ‘609, [0284]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the overlap determining technique disclosed by Yatsunami ‘609 to the device disclosed by Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno because doing so would allow for determination of an amount of ink deposited on a trailing edge of a first sheet to thereby determine whether such overlapping would result in smearing and facilitating cancelation of overlapping if such smearing was predicted.
Regarding claim 11, Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 7. Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno wherein the pre-set printing area is a first area of a leading end part of the print medium and a second area in the following end part of the print medium. Yatsunami ‘609 teaches this (Yatsunami ‘609, [0284]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the overlap determining technique disclosed by Yatsunami ‘609 to the device disclosed by Yatsunami ‘498 in view of Kuno because doing so would allow for determination of an amount of ink deposited on a trailing edge of a first sheet to thereby determine whether such overlapping would result in smearing and facilitating cancelation of overlapping if such smearing was predicted.
Claim(s) 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yatsunami in view of Kuno as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Endoh et al. (10,579,001).
Regarding claim 31, Yatsunami in view of Kuno teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein two print media are printed, overlapped, reversed. Yatsunami in view of Kuno does not teach simultaneously transporting three print media. Endoh teaches this (Endoh, see figs. 4, 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transport three print media instead of two, as disclosed by Endoh, because doing so would improve throughput. Upon applying Endoh’s three-print-media approach to Yatsunami in view of Kuno, the resultant device would meet the limitation:
after the second control, the control unit performs a third control for causing a third print medium from the supply unit to overlap the following end part of the first print medium between the intermediate roller and the transport roller, while a second surface of the first print medium is being printed onto by the printing head and the second print medium is in the reversing path.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The claims have been amended to further specify the operation of the device, but the amendments fail to distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. The rejections above have been updated to reflect the changes to the claims. 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, 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