CTFR 18/408,613 CTFR 100490 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Amendment The amendment filed March 6th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-14 remain pending in the application. Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the mechanical linkage of claims 1 and 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 8 reference a mechanical linkage which allows the rotation shaft to rotate in conjunction with the movable blade drive portion. This mechanical linkage is not described in the specification nor shown in the drawings. The closest disclosure of this feature is [0022] of the specification which references a link mechanism (not illustrated in the drawings or structurally described in any way) which allows the rotation shaft to rotate in conjunction with the movable drive portion. There is no mention or suggestion that the link mechanism is a mechanical linkage, or that there is a mechanical linkage which promotes this relationship. Additionally, claims 1 and 8 disclose that the rotation shaft rotates in conjunction with the movable drive portion such that the paddle simultaneously scrapes cloth. The language of simultaneously implies that the scraping of the cloth happens at the same time as some other function, however no other function is mentioned in the claim to be occurring simultaneously. Further, “simultaneous” or any equivalent language is not used in the specification at any point to describe the scraping action of the paddle component. Therefore, this description of simultaneous scraping in conjunction with any other action of function is unsupported by the existing disclosure of the invention and is considered new matter. 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 3, 5, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph , as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 3, 5, 10, and 12 recite the limitation "the conveyance path". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims, as claims 3, 5, 10, and 12, and the claims on which they depend, do not introduce “a conveyance path”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Akira Sago (JP 2013255970 A – hereinafter Sago) . Regarding claim 1 , Sago teaches a cutting device, comprising: a cutting section comprising a fixed blade (Fig. 12, Second Flat Blade 631), a movable blade (Fig. 12, First Flat Blade 621), and a movable blade drive portion (Fig. 12, the half of the First Flat Blade 621 which is closest to its center of rotation), configured to cut a conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 12, Label Tape 3A. While Sago does not teach that the medium is cloth, Sago does not need to disclose details related to medium as the inclusion of the material or article being worked upon by a structure does not impart patentability to the claims In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see MPEP 2115) into a predetermined length (Page 8 Para 5); a placement surface (Fig. 12, Second Placement Portion 904) for placing the conveyed long cloth medium cut by the cutting section; and a paddle component (Fig. 12, Blade 901) attached to a rotation shaft configured to rotate in a conveyance direction of the conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 12, rotation direction shown by V2; Page 7 second to last paragraph), configured to contact with the placement surface by rotating around the rotation shaft (Fig. 12(b)), and configured to scrape out the conveyed long cloth medium in the conveyance direction (Fig. 12(c)), wherein the rotation shaft rotates in conjunction, via a mechanical linkage (Fig. 4, Drive Transmission Mechanism), with a rotation of the movable blade drive portion of the cutting section such that the paddle component simultaneously scrapes out the conveyed long cloth medium from the placement surface in the conveyance direction (Page 7 second to last paragraph). Regarding claim 2 , Sago further teaches the cutting device according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the paddle components (Fig. 12, Blades 901) are attached at different attachment angles to the rotation shaft, configured to contact with the placement surface at different timings by rotating around the rotation shaft (Fig. 12, rotation shown via V2). Regarding claim 5 , Sago further teaches the cutting device according to claim 1, wherein the movable blade drive portion comprises a substantially box-shaped member provided below a conveyance path (Fig. 12, path of 3A when it is located above 631 and before it is cut) and extending in the conveyance direction (Fig. 12, the half of the First Flat Blade 621 which is closest to its center of rotation is substantially box shaped, and due to its rotation does at least occasionally extend in the conveyance direction. Also due to this rotation, it is occasionally at least partially located below the conveyance path). Regarding claim 6 , Sago further teaches the cutting device according to claim 5, wherein the movable blade drive portion has an axis parallel to a width direction of a printer (Fig. 3, Thermal Head 31) on a downstream side in the conveyance direction (Fig. 3, conveyance direction shown by arrow protruding from the front of 3A. Examiner defines axis as “one of the reference lines of a coordinate system”, and also finds that a width direction is a vague term capable of describing any direction of a three dimensional element such at the printer. Therefore, since both the movable blade drive portion and printer are both three dimensional objects existing in a coordinate system, there is some arbitrary axis of the movable blade drive portion which is parallel to some arbitrary width direction of the printer). Regarding claim 7 , Sago further teaches the cutting device according to claim 5, wherein an upper surface of the movable blade drive portion (Fig. 12, the half of the First Flat Blade 621 which is closest to its center of rotation) has a smooth sliding surface (Fig. 12(a), left flat portion of the movable blade drive portion) and a length of the fixed blade and the movable blade in a width direction of a printer is greater than a length of a width direction the conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 7). Regarding claim 8 , Sago teaches a printer apparatus, comprising: a printing component configured to print on a long cloth medium (Fig. Fig. 3, Thermal Head 31); cutting section comprising a fixed blade (Fig. 12, Second Flat Blade 631), a movable blade (Fig. 12, First Flat Blade 621), and a movable blade drive portion (Fig. 12, the half of the First Flat Blade 621 which is closest to its center of rotation), configured to cut a conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 12, Label Tape 3A. While Sago does not teach that the medium is cloth, Sago does not need to disclose details related to medium as the inclusion of the material or article being worked upon by a structure does not impart patentability to the claims In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see MPEP 2115) into a predetermined length (Page 8 Para 5); a placement surface (Fig. 12, Second Placement Portion 904) for placing the conveyed long cloth medium cut by the cutting section; and a paddle component (Fig. 12, Blade 901) attached to a rotation shaft configured to rotate in a conveyance direction of the conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 12, rotation direction shown by V2; Page 7 second to last paragraph), configured to contact with the placement surface by rotating around the rotation shaft (Fig. 12(b)), and configured to scrape out the conveyed long cloth medium in the conveyance direction (Fig. 12(c)), wherein the rotation shaft rotates in conjunction, via a mechanical linkage (Fig. 4, Drive Transmission Mechanism), with a rotation of the movable blade drive portion of the cutting section such that the paddle component simultaneously scrapes out the conveyed long cloth medium from the placement surface in the conveyance direction (Page 7 second to last paragraph). Regarding claim 9 , Sago further teaches the printer apparatus according to claim 8, wherein a plurality of the paddle components (Fig. 12, Blades 901) are attached at different attachment angles to the rotation shaft, configured to contact with the placement surface at different timings by rotating around the rotation shaft (Fig. 12, rotation shown via V2). Regarding claim 12 , Sago further teaches the printer apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the movable blade drive portion comprises a substantially box-shaped member provided below a conveyance path (Fig. 12, path of 3A when it is located above 631 and before it is cut) and extending in the conveyance direction (Fig. 12, the half of the First Flat Blade 621 which is closest to its center of rotation is substantially box shaped, and due to its rotation does at least occasionally extend in the conveyance direction. Also due to this rotation, it is occasionally at least partially located below the conveyance path). Regarding claim 13 , Sago further teaches the printer apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the movable blade drive portion has an axis parallel to a width direction of a printer (Fig. 3, Thermal Head 31) on a downstream side in the conveyance direction (Fig. 3, conveyance direction shown by arrow protruding from the front of 3A. Examiner defines axis as “one of the reference lines of a coordinate system”, and also finds that a width direction is a vague term capable of describing any direction of a three dimensional element such at the printer. Therefore, since both the movable blade drive portion and printer are both three dimensional objects existing in a coordinate system, there is some arbitrary axis of the movable blade drive portion which is parallel to some arbitrary width direction of the printer). Regarding claim 14 , Sago further teaches the printer apparatus according to claim 12, wherein an upper surface of the movable blade drive portion (Fig. 12, the half of the First Flat Blade 621 which is closest to its center of rotation) has a smooth sliding surface (Fig. 12(a), left flat portion of the movable blade drive portion) and a length of the fixed blade and the movable blade in a width direction of a printer is greater than a length of a width direction the conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 7) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3, 4, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira Sago (JP 2013255970 A – hereinafter Sago) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Philip Billings et al. (US 4494166 A – hereinafter Billings). Regarding claim 3 , Sago does not teach the cutting device according to claim 1, further comprising: a destaticizing member provided at a position at which the destaticizing member is configured to contact with the conveyed long cloth medium scraped out from the placement surface from below in the conveyance path of the conveyed long cloth medium, and configured to destaticize the cloth medium in contact with the conveyed long cloth medium. However, Billings teaches a sheet/web conveying machine comprising a destaticizing member (Fig. 3, Brush 92) provided at a position at which the destaticizing member is configured to contact with the conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 3, examiner interprets that this is a recitation of intended use, and although the medium is not disclosed to be cloth, it would work with cloth as the medium) scraped out from the placement surface (Fig. 3, lower portion of Channel Means 80) from below in the conveyance path of the conveyed long cloth medium, and configured to destaticize the cloth medium in contact with the conveyed long cloth medium (Col. 5, lines 1-18). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sago to include the limitations of claim 2 above as taught by Billings. Doing so is beneficial as it prevents the attraction of dust (Billings; Col. 1, lines 10-23). Regarding claim 4 , the existing combination of Sago and Billings does not teach the cutting device according to claim 3, wherein the destaticizing member is provided approximately vertically below the rotation shaft in a vertical direction. Billings already teaches that the destaticizing member is at a height which causes interference between the workpiece and the destaticizing member, meaning that when in combination with Sago, the destaticizing member would also be at a height where it comes into contact with the top of the paddle, since the paddle of Sago is long and flexible such that it interferes with the structure that contains and contacts the workpiece on the opposing side, the opposing side being where the destaticizing member would reside if it was located vertically below the rotation shaft in a vertical direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location of the destaticizing member such that it is provided approximately vertically below the rotation shaft in a vertical direction, as it has been held that the position of a feature may be in a different location as an obvious matter of design choice as long as it does not modify the operation of the device .In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). Regarding claim 10 , Sago does not teach the printer apparatus according to claim 8, further comprising: a destaticizing member provided at a position at which the destaticizing member is configured to contact with the conveyed long cloth medium scraped out from the placement surface from below in the conveyance path of the conveyed long cloth medium, and configured to destaticize the cloth medium in contact with the conveyed long cloth medium. However, Billings teaches a sheet/web conveying machine comprising a destaticizing member (Fig. 3, Brush 92) provided at a position at which the destaticizing member is configured to contact with the conveyed long cloth medium (Fig. 3, examiner interprets that this is a recitation of intended use, and although the medium is not disclosed to be cloth, it would work with cloth as the medium) scraped out from the placement surface (Fig. 3, lower portion of Channel Means 80) from below in the conveyance path of the conveyed long cloth medium, and configured to destaticize the cloth medium in contact with the conveyed long cloth medium (Col. 5, lines 1-18). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sago to include the limitations of claim 10 above as taught by Billings. Doing so is beneficial as it prevents the attraction of dust (Billings; Col. 1, lines 10-23). Regarding claim 11 , the existing combination of Sago and Billings does not teach the printer apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the destaticizing member is provided approximately vertically below the rotation shaft in a vertical direction. Billings already teaches that the destaticizing member is at a height which causes interference between the workpiece and the destaticizing member, meaning that when in combination with Sago, the destaticizing member would also be at a height where it comes into contact with the top of the paddle, since the paddle of Sago is long and flexible such that it interferes with the structure that contains and contacts the workpiece on the opposing side, the opposing side being where the destaticizing member would reside if it was located vertically below the rotation shaft in a vertical direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location of the destaticizing member such that it is provided approximately vertically below the rotation shaft in a vertical direction, as it has been held that the position of a feature may be in a different location as an obvious matter of design choice as long as it does not modify the operation of the device In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 3/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14 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. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 ELLA LORRAINE KEENA whose telephone number is (571)272-1806. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am - 5:00 pm ET. 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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. /ELLA L KEENA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 2 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 3 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 4 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 5 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 6 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 7 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 8 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 9 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 10 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 11 Art Unit: 3724 Application/Control Number: 18/408,613 Page 12 Art Unit: 3724
Prosecution Insights