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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a cantilever” in claim 5;
“pressing part” in claim 5;
“driving unit” in claim 5; and
“a cantilever” in claim 35.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 35-37, 39, and 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352).
Regarding claim 35, Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352) teach a process cartridge (fig.88&89), detachably installed in an electronic image-forming apparatus (fig.2), comprising: a cartridge body (fig.3&88, #71/#1071); a photosensitive drum, rotatably disposed at the cartridge body (fig.3&88, #62); a developing roller, rotatably disposed at the cartridge body (fig.3&89, #32); a hub, disposed at one end of the photosensitive drum, the outer circumference of the hub is provided with a gear portion (fig.88, #36); a force receiving unit (fig.88&89, #1064), disposed at one end of the cartridge body (fig.88&89, end with #1073), configured to receive a driving force (fig.91, from #1081); and wherein the process cartridge further comprises a cantilever (fig.88-89, #1001), and the cantilever is fixedly disposed at the cartridge body and is positioned at the same end of the cartridge body with the force receiving unit (see fig.88-89, #1001 fixed next to #1062 via #1071a) and is positioned outside the force receiving unit in an axial direction of the photosensitive drum (fig.89(b), location of #1001 in left-right direction relative to #1064); wherein the process cartridge further comprises a drum frame for supporting the photosensitive drum (fig.4&88, #71/1071), and the cantilever is disposed on the drum frame (fig.88, #1001 connected by #1071a to #1071); and wherein the cantilever comprises an upper end surface (fig.88(b), upper surface to which #1001 indicator points) and a lower end surface (fig.88, #1001b); the upper end surface is arranged as a plane (fig.88, see upper flat/planar surface); and wherein the process cartridge further comprises a fixed part connected to the cartridge body (fig.88, #1071); and when viewed from an end side of the process cartridge, the cantilever is connected to the fixed part (fig.88&89, #1001 connected to #1071a via #1001c) and extends toward the photosensitive drum (fig.88-89, #1001a projects toward #64).
Regarding claim 36, Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352) teach a process cartridge further comprising a charging roller (fig.3, #66); and on a plane perpendicular to a rotation axis of the photosensitive drum, the cantilever is positioned above a line connecting a rotation center of the charging roller and a rotation center of the photosensitive drum (fig.3&88-89, #1001 is above the line connecting #62-#66).
Regarding claim 37, Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352) teach a process cartridge wherein, a distance between the cantilever and the rotation axis of the photosensitive drum does not change (fig.88, #1002 holds #1001 in place and #1001 does not change distance when the cartridge is either fully mounted or outside of the apparatus).
Regarding claim 39, Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352) teach a process cartridge wherein, the cantilever is rectangular and the upper end surface and the lower end surface are parallel to each other (fig.88, #1001 main portion is rectangular with surface to which #1001 points and surface #1001b are parallel).
Regarding claim 41, Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352) teach a process cartridge wherein, a driving unit is disposed in the electronic image-forming apparatus (fig.90&91, #1081); the driving unit comprises a cylindrical portion (fig.90&91, #1081), a drive transmission portion (fig.90&91, #1081a) and an input gear portion (fig.90-91, Large outer ring of #1081); the drive transmission portion is disposed at the cylindrical portion (see fig.90&91), the input gear portion is disposed on an outer surface of the cylindrical portion and is near the drive transmission portion (fig.90-91, large outer ring of #1081 on outer surface of #1081 and can be considered near #1081a); the force receiving unit can be engaged with the drive transmission portion to receive the driving force to the photosensitive drum and the developing roller gear to rotate (fig.91, #1064 in #1081a); and the developing roller gear is not engaged with the input gear portion to receive the driving force (fig.91, #36a not engages with large outer ring of #1081).
Regarding claim 42, Matsumaru et al. (US Pub.2020/0301352) teach a process cartridge wherein an end cover is disposed at one end of the cartridge body (fig.88, #1073), the end cover comprises a first side wall (fig.88, most ‘rightward’ flat surface of #1073 with hole to surround #1064) and a second side wall (fig.88, flat ‘leftward’ side wall to which indicator #1073 points); the first side wall is arranged around the force receiving unit (fig.88, see surrounding #1064) and the second side wall is disposed at outermost side of one end of the cartridge body (fig.88, ‘leftward’ part of #1073 is outermost); the first side wall and the force receiving unit are disposed away from the second side wall in an axial direction of the photosensitive drum (see fig.88, ‘rightward’ portion of #1073 is set away toward the center in the axial direction from ‘leftward’ #1073).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 35 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Further, the applicants asserted that claim 40 was indicated as allowable. This is incorrect. Claim 40 was allowable due to its dependence on the allowable subject matter of claim 38 and all intervening claim language, none of which was incorporated in amended claim 35. Claim 38 remains indicated as allowable, current claim 35 remains rejected but with different prior art due to the changed subject matter of claim 35.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 31-34 are allowed.
Claim 38 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “on a plane perpendicular to an axial direction of the photosensitive drum, a projection of the cantilever at least partially coincides with a projection of the photosensitive drum” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claims 5 and 31-34.
Prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “a thickness of the cantilever is between 0.6 mm and 3.5 mm” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 38.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA K ROTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2154. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30AM-3:30 PM.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached on 571-272-3555. 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.
/LKR/
3/21/2026
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852