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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 25, 27, 28, 30, 32, 42, 43, 45, and 47 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 22 October 2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I / Species I(A) in the reply filed on 22 October 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “The Examiner's restriction is improper because it relies on formulaic recitation of the standard burden criteria without providing specific facts demonstrating how these criteria apply to the present case.” This is not found persuasive because said recitation is a standard in patent examination, and the Examiner further indicated that “the process/method of printing as claimed can be practiced by an apparatus/arrangement that performs printing according to a raster that is rectilinear”, showing that the inventions are distinct. Applicant further argues that the burden criteria is not met since “both claimed invention groups share common subject matter that would result in significant overlap in search and examination” and “While the Examiner correctly identifies that the inventions are related as process and apparatus, this relationship here generally reduces rather than increases search burden”, but please note that it is common and expected that different inventions included in an application will have overlapping subject matter, but that does not negate the fact that their differences will require a different field of search and that prior art applicable to one would not likely be applicable to the other, creating a burden. Furthermore, regarding the Species Restriction, Applicant argues that “The difference between 25% raster coverage and 50% nozzle path intersection represents variations of the same technical solution, not concepts requiring separate searches”, please note that, as indicated in the prior office action, each species contains subject matter that is not shared by the other, creating a separate embodiment and requiring a separate search. Also, please note that the teachings included in Species I(B) are discussed as a “sixth embodiment”, which is a different embodiment than the teachings included in Species I(A), showing that even in the disclosure, the two are included as different embodiments (i.e. Species).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 19 August 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 16, 18, 22, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oshige (US 2012/0133694.)
Regarding claim 1,
Oshige discloses a method of printing for improved image fidelity, comprising the steps of:
providing at least one printing unit [40 in figs. 1-2B; including heads 41 in fig. 3] configured to print at least one print material according to a set of print data [paragraphs 0038-0039 and 0043-0045];
providing a printing raster containing raster locations, each raster location associated with a portion of the print data [see figs. 5A-5B; paragraphs 0044 and 0064];
conducting a first printing pass by moving the printing unit relative to a printing substrate [S in fig. 2A] in a first printing direction while printing at least one print material according to at least a portion of the print data [fig. 4; paragraphs 0054-0055 and 0058];
conducting a second printing pass by moving the printing unit relative to the printing substrate in a second printing direction while printing the at least one print material according to at least a portion of the print data [fig. 4; paragraphs 0054-0055 and 0058];
wherein the first printing direction and the second printing direction are disposed at a non-orthogonal differential angle [as seen in fig. 8; paragraphs 0081 and 0083]; and
wherein the printing raster, the first printing direction and the second printing direction are together selected such that at least 25% of the raster locations defined in the printing raster are capable of being printed by the printing unit during each of the first printing pass and the second printing pass [as seen in fig. 4; paragraphs 0054-0055 and 0083; by requiring four passes to complete an image, 25% of the image is printed at the raster locations for each pass.]
Regarding claim 2,
Oshige further discloses wherein a spacing between the raster locations in a direction perpendicular to the relative motion created during the first printing pass is substantially equal to a spacing between the raster locations in a direction perpendicular to the relative motion created during the second printing pass [as seen in fig. 8; the raster locations are spaced equally in both pass directions; the spacing in a perpendicular direction of the relative motions is capable of being equal, as shown by the symmetric direction of each printing pass; paragraphs 0030 and 0085.]
Regarding claim 5,
Oshige further discloses wherein the printing raster is represented by a regular tessellation scheme that is a hexagonal grid, wherein the printing raster includes a plurality of pixels, wherein a center of each pixel in the printing raster is equidistance to a center of each neighboring pixel [please note that the printing raster that is printed on the medium has no functional or structural relationship with the print medium (i.e. the paper merely is the substrate that the raster happens to be printed on). The printing raster represents printed matter which is being claimed for its communicative content, not because it changes the nature of the print medium in any sense. Since the printed matter is not functionally or structurally related to the associated physical substrate, the printed matter (in this case the printing raster) is owed no patentable weight, and cannot distinguish the claims over any particular piece of prior art.]
Regarding claim 7,
Oshige further discloses wherein the at least one print material is a plurality of print materials and wherein at least a portion of the different print materials are printed by separate print units [41 in fig. 3; paragraphs 0043 and 0045.]
Regarding claim 8,
Oshige further discloses wherein the at least one print unit is a plurality of print units that print the same print material [paragraph 0043.]
Regarding claim 16,
Oshige further discloses wherein the first printing pass and the second printing pass overlap each other and at least a portion of the print data is printed during the first printing pass and at least a portion of the print data is printed during the second printing pass [s seen in fig. 8; paragraphs 0081 and 0100.]
Regarding claim 18,
Oshige further discloses wherein said printing is performed in a multi-pass printing mode wherein at least a portion of the substrate receives ink in at least two different printing passes using substantially the same printing direction [as seen in fig. 4; multi-pass mode can do multiple passes in the x-direction, as applied to the teachings in fig. 8; paragraphs 0040 and 0054.]
Regarding claim 22,
Oshige further discloses wherein the print unit is transported to the print substrate [fig. 2B shows the X-axial stage 31 and the Y-axial stage 32] and the print substrate remains static following the first printing pass and the second printing pass [paragraphs 0042 and 0044; in some cases, the head unit is moved by the stages, and in other instances the substrate may remain stationary until the printing operation is completed and the ink is dried.]
Regarding claim 63,
Oshige discloses a method of printing for improved image fidelity, comprising the steps of.
providing at least one printing unit [40 in figs. 1-2B; including heads 41 in fig. 3] configured to print at least one print material according to a set of print data [paragraphs 0038-0039 and 0043-0045];
providing a printing raster containing raster locations, each raster location associated with a portion of the print data [as seen in figs. 5A-5B; paragraphs 0044 and 0064];
conducting a first printing pass by moving the printing unit relative to a printing substrate [S in fig. 2A] in a first printing direction while printing at least one print material according to at least a portion of the print data [as seen in fig. 4; paragraphs 0054-0055 and 0058];
conducting a second printing pass by moving the printing unit relative to the printing substrate in a second printing direction while printing the at least one print material according to at least a portion of the print data [as seen in fig. 4; paragraphs 0054-0055 and 0058];
wherein the first printing direction and the second printing direction are disposed at a non-orthogonal and nonparallel angle [as seen in fig. 8; paragraphs 0081 and 0083];
wherein the printing raster, the first direction and the second printing direction are together selected such that at least 25% of the raster locations defined in the printing raster are capable of being printed by the printing unit during each of the first printing pass and the second printing pass [as seen in figs. 4 and 8; paragraphs 0054-0055 and 0083; by requiring four passes to complete an image, 25% of the image is printed at the raster locations for each pass]; and
wherein the first printing pass and the second printing pass are conducted with the nozzle array arranged to be substantially parallel to an axis of the print raster [as seen in figs. 2A-2B; paragraphs 0043-0044.]
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.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshige.
Regarding claims 6 and 19,
Oshige discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above and further discloses (regarding claim 19) the method further comprising the steps of.
conducting a third printing pass by moving the printing unit relative to the printing substrate in a third printing direction while printing the at least one print material according to at least a portion of the print data;
wherein the third printing direction is nonparallel to the first printing direction and the second printing direction [figs. 7 and 10A show parallel printing passes, and figs. 8, 10B, and 13B show symmetric printing passes that are non-parallel; paragraphs 0088-0090 and 0110-0113].
Oshige fails to expressly disclose wherein the differential angle between the two printing directions is an integer multiple of 60 degrees (claim 6) and wherein first printing direction, the second printing direction and the third printing direction are angled relative to one another by an integer that is a multiple of 60 degrees (claim 19.)
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the differential angle between the printing directions be an integer multiple of 60 degrees, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See also In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). One would have been motivated to optimize the differential angle for the purpose of reducing irregularities in printing, this performing stable and efficient printing.
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANNELLE M LEBRON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Douglas X Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
/JANNELLE M LEBRON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853