DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 1 has been amended to reflect the limitation of cancelled Claim 3. Claims 2 and 4 – 14 remain as originally presented. No new subject matter has been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2025-09-09 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that Hamaguchi does not teach the switching of the speed of a tool bit at regular intervals, pointing to the term “intermittently” in paragraph [0039] of Hamaguchi.
However, the term “intermittent” is not synonymous with “irregular”. In addition, Hamaguchi discusses the procedure of cutting a pipe on an analog lathe, and then describes changing the speed of a tool bit by varying the output voltage of a power supply according to a prescribed waveform ([0040]). The term “waveform” indicates a degree of regularity to the change in speed of the tool bit, and does not lead one of ordinary skill in the art to believe that Hamaguchi teaches irregular changes in the speed of the tool bit. For these reasons, the updated rejection below is sustained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, and 4 - 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita (US Patent 10,539,921) in view of Hamaguchi et al (US PGP 2012/0077116).
Yamashita teaches a support for an electrophotographic photoreceptor (Abstract). The support of Yamashita is a pipe having a cut surface on the outer periphery, wherein the average waviness and peak count measured on the outer surface lie in specific ranges (Col. 2, lines 18 – 24). Yamashita teaches that such a support can be incorporated into a photoreceptor, suppressing striped density unevenness in the image produced using such a photoreceptor (Col. 2, line 66 – Col. 3, line 3). Yamashita defines the average waviness (Wa) of the support surface (Col. 3, lines 52 – 56), which is related to the unevenness of the surface, similar to the amplitude parameter of the instant application. Yamashita recognizes the relationship between waviness or periodic unevenness of the surface of the support, and striped density unevenness in the resulting image (Col. 3, lines 4 – 29). Yamashita teaches that image density unevenness can be suppressed if the waviness of the support is controlled below a certain threshold (Col. 3, lines 30 – 45).
Yamashita exemplifies the formation of a conductive support (Col. 26, lines 49 – 67), made from an aluminum alloy (JIS A6063) similar to that used in the instant application. The support is cut from a pipe to have an outer diameter of 30 mm, similar to the support in the instant application, on the same lathe as used in the instant application (RL-550EX). The feed rate of the cutting operation is 0.45 mm/rev, slightly lower than the 0.5 mm/rev employed in the preparation of Examples 1, 2, and 3 of the instant application. These examples all have amplitude values of 0.22 mm or less (Specification, Table 1).
Yamashita does not appear to teach varying the feed rate while cutting the electroconductive support on a lathe.
Hamaguchi teaches an electrophotographic photoreceptor having a conductive layer disposed on a support (Abstract). Hamaguchi recognizes the problem of interferential streaks in developed images relating to the cutting pattern on the surface of the support of the photoreceptor ([0004], [0035]), and points to disruption of periodicity in this pattern as a solution ([0021]). Hamaguchi teaches that interferential streaks in the developed image can be reduced by controlling the cutting pattern on the surface of the support, which is achieved by varying the moving speed of the tool bit relative to the support during cutting on a lathe ([0036] – [0039]). Hamaguchi also teaches that an analog lathe may be used instead of a CNC lathe, wherein the speed of the tool bit is changed according to variation of the voltage output of a power supply according to a prescribed waveform ([0040]). The power supply waveform indicates a pattern or regularity of the change in speed of the tool bit. Hamaguchi gives an example of cutting a support on a lathe and alternating the moving speed (analogous to the feed rate) of the tool bit during cutting ([0119]).
In preparing the photoreceptor comprising a support as taught by Yamashita, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been taught by Hamaguchi to vary the feed rate during cutting of the support on a lathe so as to reduce the appearance of streaks in a developed image. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to prepare the support as taught by Yamashita wherein the feed rate is varied as taught by Hamaguchi, resulting in a support which would inherently possess a value for amplitude in the range satisfying the inequality of Claim 1, and would inherently possess at least two amplitude peaks in a period and amplitude spectrum, satisfying Claim 1.
Two of the three examples of the instant application prepared as described above have a value for amplitude of 0.18 or less. Being produced in a substantially identical manner, conductive support Example 1 of Yamashita would inherently possess a value for amplitude in the same range, satisfying the inequality stated in Claim 2.
In preparing the photoreceptor comprising a support as described above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in the course of routine experimentation, to vary the feed rate during cutting of the support on a lathe among three different speeds, resulting in a support which would inherently possess three amplitude peaks in a period and amplitude spectrum, satisfying Claim 4.
In preparing the photoreceptor comprising a support as described above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the surface roughness pattern of the support by controlling the feed rate pattern during cutting of the support on a lathe, so as to suppress formation of streaks in a developed image. The resulting support would therefore possess frequency components in period ranges of the period and amplitude spectrum lying in the ranges stated in Claim 5 and Claim 6.
Yamashita discloses the preparation of a photoreceptor using the conductive support described above (Col. 28, lines 24 – 26). An undercoat layer, a charge generating layer, and a charge transport layer are disposed on the support, in that order (Col. 28, line 27 – Col. 30, line 3). Those layers together make up a photosensitive layer, satisfying Claims 7 and 8.
Yamashita discloses the preparation of a photoreceptor using the conductive support described above (Col. 28, lines 24 – 26). An undercoat layer, a charge generating layer, and a charge transport layer are disposed on the support, in that order (Col. 28, line 27 – Col. 30, line 3). Where the support of Yamashita has been cut on a lathe with a varied feed rate, the resulting photoreceptor satisfies Claim 9, Claim 10, Claim 11, and Claim 12.
Yamashita describes a process cartridge comprising the photoreceptor described above (Col. 24, lines 41 – 52). The process cartridge is detachably attached to an image forming apparatus, satisfying Claim 13.
Yamashita describes an image forming apparatus, to which the process cartridge described above is detachably attached (Col. 23, line 55 – Col. 24, line 2). The image forming apparatus includes the photoreceptor described above, a charging unit, an electrostatic latent image forming unit, a developing unit, and a transfer unit, satisfying Claim 14.
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 Grant S Seiler whose telephone number is (571)272-3015. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 5:30 Pacific.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/GRANT STEVEN SEILER/Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/PETER L VAJDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 11/12/2025