DETAILED ACTION
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, 3-9, 11-13, 15-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizoguchi et al. (4,926,196) in view of Nakamura (2009/0067866) and Osumi et al. (2011/0285776).
Regarding claims 1, 13 and 20, Mizoguchi teaches a liquid ejection apparatus, method and computer-readable non-transitory medium, comprising:
a liquid ejection head (fig. 10, item IJU) that performs an ejection operation of ejecting a liquid from an ejection port (fig. 11, item 221);
a cap movable to a closed position at which the cap covers the ejection port and an open position at which the cap does not cover the ejection port (col. 3, lines 45-55);
a temperature obtaining unit (fig. 13, item 917) configured to obtain a temperature of the liquid ejection head (claim 1);
a recovery unit (fig. 13, item M3) configured to perform a recovery process of recovering liquid ejection performance of the liquid ejection head (claim 1); and
a control unit configured to, in a case where a power of the liquid ejection apparatus is turned on after the power is turned off with the cap at the open position, control the recovery process based on the temperature obtained by the temperature obtaining unit after the power-off (claim 1),
wherein the temperature obtaining unit regularly obtains the temperature of the liquid ejection head during the ejection operation of the liquid ejection head (see fig. 14B, note that the temperature is taken during a restoration process wherein the suction cap is pumped to eject liquid from the head into the cap. Note also that “regularly obtains” can mean any number of things. Note that the temperature is taken during the restoration process, which itself is executed in pauses from image liquid ejection, and thus if restoration processes are executed regularly in between printing processes, i.e., during ejection operation, so are temperature readings), and
the control unit controls the recovery process based on a highest temperature among temperatures obtained by the temperature obtaining unit after the power-off (Note that “a highest temperature of temperatures obtained” has not been defined with any specificity. The language does not necessarily require that two different temperatures are obtained. Here, “temperatures obtained” is being defined as the last obtained temperature, which is the highest, last obtained temperature by definition. That is, a single temperature may be the only temperature of the temperatures obtained).
Mizoguchi teaches obtaining a temperature after the power is turned on and executing a maintenance process based on the temperature instead of obtaining a temperature reading from before the power was turned off and executing a maintenance process based on that temperature. Nakamura teaches obtaining a reading of a temperature sensor just before a power off and using that temperature reading to determine controls for an image forming apparatus upon start up after the power off (Nakamura, [0192]-[0194]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use temperatures readings from before a power off as opposed to readings from after a power on because doing so would allow for quicker ascertainment of pertinent temperatures, thereby saving time required to obtain temperatures again. Upon combination of Mizoguchi, the resultant device would use the highest temperature among temperatures obtained before power-off.
Examiner is aware that Nakamura is directed to the temperature of a fixing roller and not a printhead. Nonetheless, Examiner maintains that the technique disclosed by Nakamura would have been applicable to any number of temperature dependent controls.
Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura does not teach wherein the highest of a plurality of temperatures is obtained by the temperature obtaining unit and used for corresponding recovery. Osumi teaches this (Osumi, [0046]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obtain a temperature history and select the highest of the temperatures on which to base a recovery operation, as disclosed by Osumi, in the device disclosed by Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura because doing so would allow for more precise determination of the degree of recovery necessary as the degree of recovery would be proportional to the highest temperature obtained.
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus and method, according to claims 1 and 13, respectively, wherein the control unit controls the recovery process based on the temperature of the liquid ejection head before the power-off and a first elapsed time from the power-off to the subsequent power-on (Mizoguchi, claim 1, Note that, upon combination, the resultant device would meet the limitation).
Regarding claims 4 and 16, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus and method, according to claims 1 and 13, respectively, wherein the control unit in a case where the power-off occurred in the ejection operation, performs first recovery control that controls the recovery process based on the temperature obtained by the temperature obtaining unit at occurrence of the power-off and a second elapsed time from an end of the ejection operation to the power-off, and in a case where the power-off occurred after the end of the ejection operation, performs second recovery control that controls the recovery process based on the temperature of the liquid ejection head at the end of the ejection operation, the second elapsed time, and a third elapsed time from the power-off to the power-on (Mizoguchi, claim 1, Note that combining the multiple time and temperature ranges disclosed by Mizoguchi could be extrapolated into any number of combinations of ranges, each corresponding to a different intensity of recovery).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus and method, according to claims 1 and 13, respectively, wherein the recovery unit performs a recovery process that forcibly discharges the liquid from the ejection port of the liquid ejection head, and the control unit controls an amount of the liquid to be discharged in the recovery process (Mizoguchi, claims 1, 2).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus and method, according to claims 5 and 17, respectively, wherein the recovery unit includes: the cap; and a negative pressure generation unit configured to generate a negative pressure inside the cap, and the recovery unit forcibly discharges the liquid from the ejection port by generating the negative pressure inside the cap with the negative pressure generation unit with the cap at the closed position (Mizoguchi, claims 1, 2).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claims 6 and 18, respectively, wherein the negative pressure generation unit is a suction pump communicating with the cap, and the control unit controls at least one of a driving amount and a driving speed of the suction pump (Mizoguchi, claims 1, 2).
Regarding claim 8, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1, wherein the liquid ejection head includes: a channel communicating with the ejection port; and a driving unit configured to cause the liquid supplied to the channel to flow (Mizoguchi, col. 8, lines 45-57, Note that there is necessarily such a channel and such a driving unit).
Regarding claim 9, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1, wherein the liquid ejection head includes: a channel communicating with the ejection port; a liquid holding unit communicating with the channel; and a circulation pump for supplying the liquid from the liquid holding unit to the channel and collecting the liquid from the channel to the liquid holding unit (Mizoguchi, col. 8, lines 45-57, Note that there is necessarily such a channel and such a driving unit).
Regarding claim 11, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1, wherein the liquid ejection head is mounted on a carriage that moves along a main scanning direction relative to a print medium conveyed in a predetermined conveyance direction by a conveyance unit, the main scanning direction crossing the conveyance direction (see figs. 3, 10).
Regarding claim 12, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1, wherein the temperature obtaining unit is provided to the liquid ejection head (Note that all disclosed components can be said to be provided to all of the other claimed components).
Regarding claims 21 and 23, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1, note that, upon Osumi teaches obtaining temperatures at regular intervals since a last recovery process, and combining this with Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura would yield a device where the highest temperature of a plurality of regularly taken temperatures before the device was turned off would be used when the device was turned back on. Note that the temperatures are taken since a last cleaning, i.e., during a printing operation.
Regarding claim 22, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1, note that, upon Osumi teaches obtaining temperatures at regular intervals since a last recovery process, and combining this with Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura would yield a device where the highest temperature of a plurality of regularly taken temperatures before the device was turned off would be used when the device was turned back on.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takeoshi et al. (2021/0237477).
Regarding claim 10, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claim 1. Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi does not teach wherein the liquid contains at least a resin with a glass transition point of 120°C or lower. Takeoshi teaches this (Takeoshi, [0079]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use an ink with fine resin particles of the type disclosed by Takeoshi because doing so would amount to combining a known ink composition with a known printer to obtain predictable results.
Claim(s) 22 and 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Booth.
Regarding claims 22 and 24, Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi teaches the liquid ejection apparatus, according to claims 1 and 13, respectively. Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi does not teach wherein, in a case when the power of the liquid ejection apparatus is turned on after the power is turned off with the cap at the closed position, not performing the recovery process. Booth teaches wherein, during an idle time of a printer, a printhead can either be capped or can have a recovery executed periodically to keep the nozzles fresh (Booth, [0006]). It would have been obvious to not execute a recovery on a printhead after an idle time if the printhead had been capped and to execute a recovery on the printhead if the printhead had not been capped, as disclosed by Booth, in the device disclosed by Mizoguchi in view of Nakamura and Osumi because doing so would save the time end energy required for a recovery upon startup if such a recovery was not necessary due to the nozzles being kept fresh due to the capping during idle time.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
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