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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirata et al (US 20180193559).
Regarding claims 1, 14 and 15, Hirata et al teach (Figs. 1-17c) An information processing apparatus/method and program comprising a liquid level state determiner (1) that determines, by using a light reception signal corresponding to light reception intensity of emitted light from a light emitter (52) generated for each of a plurality of light receivers (51s) arranged in a vertical direction to face the light emitter, a liquid level state ([0075]) of a liquid provided between the light emitter and the light receivers.
Regarding claim 2, Hirata et al teach (Fig. 4A) the light receivers are provided on an upper side and a lower side with respect to an optical axis of the light emitter (with respect to the center emitter).
Regarding claim 3, Hirata et al teach (Fig. 4A) a plurality of the light emitter is provided in a circumferential direction on a reference plane including an optical axis of the light emitter. That is, figure 4a shows center emitted light as an optical axis of the light emitter while two upper 52s surround the middle emitter in a circumferential direction centered around that axis.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Perrelli et al (US 20180344070).
Regarding claim 1, Perrelli et al teach An information processing apparatus comprising a liquid level state determiner (figure 6) that determines, by using a light reception signal corresponding to light reception intensity of emitted light from a light emitter (103) generated for each of a plurality of light receivers (104) arranged in a vertical direction to face the light emitter, a liquid level state ([0142]) of a liquid provided between the light emitter and the light receivers.
Regarding claim 4, Perrelli et al teach ([0142]) the liquid level state determiner determines the liquid level state on a basis of a signal level difference between a light reception signal generated by a light receiver arranged on an upper side in the vertical direction and a light reception signal generated by a light receiver arranged on a lower side.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al in view of Sato et al (US 20210231483).
Regarding claim 6, Hirata et al teach the invention set forth above. Hirata et al do not teach light reception adjusters that adjust a light reception direction of the light receivers are further included. Sato et al teach light reception adjusters that adjust a light reception direction of the light receivers are further included. It is known to include light reception adjusters that adjust a light reception direction of the light receivers to increase product versatility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 7-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY KO whose telephone number is (571)272-1926. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5pm.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/TONY KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
TK