DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the phase being executed” and “the movement of the printing unit” lack antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-4, 8, 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kono (6,183,151) in view of Yoshimura et al. (2003/0063177).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Kono teaches a printing apparatus and method comprising:
a maintenance unit (fig. 1, item 16) capable of executing maintenance processing including a plurality of phases comprised of maintenance operations for well maintaining and recovering liquid ejection from a printing unit configured to print a print medium, wherein at least one phase of the plurality of phases includes a process of moving the printing unit to change from one maintenance operation to another maintenance operation (col. 5, lines 20-44, col. 8, lines 57-59, note that capping with suction by the pump, capping without suction by the pump, and wiping can all be performed as phases. Note that the one of the plurality of phases is being taken to be capping with suction after wiping and movement of the printing unit from the wiper to the capping position. Note that wiping may be performed before printing, whereas capping is performed in between print jobs. Nonetheless, the printing unit must be moved between the wiping and the capping. Note that the claim does not require that the movement between maintenance operations occurs without intervening events);
a regulation unit configured to regulate movement of the printing unit when the cover member is in the open position, the regulation unit defining a predetermined position at which the movement of the printing unit is regulated (cols. 4-5, lines 61-8, note that the carriage motor, belt, etc. regulate the position of the carriage and control the carriage to move to the capping position, i.e., a predetermined position); and
a control unit capable of controlling the maintenance processing and configured to, is the at least one phase of the plurality of phases and after the printing unit reaches the predetermined position (col. 5, lines 20-44, see figs. 2A. 2B, Note that when the carriage drives the switching lever 66 to disengage hole 82c, the pump is driven when the convey roller 36 is rotated reversely. Conversely, when the carriage contacts the lever 66 to engage the hole 82c, the pump is disabled do that capping with pumping is disabled).
Kono does not teach a cover member displaceable between a closed position where an internal constituent of the printing apparatus is blocked from an outside and an open position where the internal constituent is exposed to the outside,
in a case where the cover member is displaced from the closed position to the open position during the maintenance processing, to execute a control operation to interrupt the maintenance processing,
wherein, in a case when the cover member is displaced from the open position to the closed position after an execution of the control operation, the control unit resumes the maintenance processing from a beginning of the phase in which the maintenance processing is interrupted.
Yoshimura teaches this (Yoshimura, [0013]-[0014], [0018], [0021], Note that the controller determines whether to restart maintenance from where it was left off or from the beginning of maintenance altogether depending on the type of maintenance interrupted). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to add the cover and suction pump functionality disclosed by Yoshimura to the device disclosed by Kono because doing so would allow for pausing suction and other mechanical movements when the interior of the apparatus was exposed to a user, thereby preventing injury to a user, and automatic resumption of such suction and movements upon closing of the cover.
Regarding claim 2, Kono in view of Yoshimura teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein in a case where the maintenance processing is executed, in a case where the phase that is being executed does not includes the process of moving the printing unit, the control unit executes another control operation to continue the maintenance processing (Kono, col. 5, lines 20-44, Note that when the pumping is enabled, pumping continues).
Regarding claim 3, Kono in view of Yoshimura teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the printing unit ejects liquid while moving in a direction intersecting a direction of conveyance of the print medium by a conveying unit configured to convey the print medium (Kono, see fig. 1), and the control unit executes the first control in a case where the printing unit moves to a predetermined position (fig. 1, position corresponding to cleaning unit 16).
Regarding claim 4, Kono in view of Yoshimura teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein driving force of the conveying unit is transmitted to the maintenance unit based on movement of the printing unit to the predetermined position, and the maintenance unit changes the maintenance operations by the driving force (Kono, col. 5, lines 20-44, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Kono in view of Yoshimura teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the printing apparatus comprises a detection unit configured to detect opening and closing of the cover member (Yoshimura, [0013]-[0014]).
Regarding claim 9, Kono in view of Yoshimura teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 5, further comprising: a regulation unit configured to regulate the movement of the printing unit in a case where the cover member is in the open position (Kono, Note that anything controlling the movement of the printing unit could be said to be such a “regulation unit.” Examiner is mapping the carriage motor, which, when not energized, does not move the printing unit, as the regulation unit).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/14/2026 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