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 .
Detailed Office Action
1. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 8, and 15 are independent.
Acknowledgement of Election without Traverse
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II in the reply filed on May 11, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 8-20 corresponding to non-elected Species I are withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejection – 35 U.S.C. 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takemura et al. (US 2017/0038719 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takemura et al. (hereinafter referred to as Takemura) discloses an image forming apparatus (100 in Fig. 1, para 0031 and 0032) comprising:
an image forming unit (in 101, the image forming unit including four stations 120-123, Fig. 1, para 0024) configured to form an image on a sheet (110) based on an image forming condition (para 0045-0047);
a reading unit (including color sensors 200 in Figs. 1 and 2) configured to read a test image (measurement images 601, para 0067) formed on the sheet by the image forming unit (having 120-123 in Fig. 1), the test image including a plurality of images formed based on mutually different image forming conditions (note Fig. 6 and para 0057, “image forming conditions for forming the measurement images 601, 602, 603, 604, and 605 have relationships expressed in formular 1; para 0094) (the adjustment unit adjusts an image forming condition based on the measured test images, so there are different test images and different image forming conditions) (abstract, para 0010, 0036, 0047, Fig. 6, para 0057, 0094); and
a controller configured to generate, based on a reading result regarding
the test image read by the reading unit (color sensors 200), both a first image forming condition for a first target maximum density and a second image forming condition for a second target maximum density higher than the first target maximum density (Fig. 6, para 0057, 0094 “In the maximum density adjustment control, it is necessary to set the image forming conditions so that measurement images having higher densities than an image having a target maximum density estimated from the current environment conditions are formed. This is to determine a laser power for forming an image having a target maximum density based on interpolation from the measurement results of measurement images as described in Fig. 7.” and 0113 end “as described above, the sensor control unit 1123 determines image forming conditions based on the sensor output values corresponding to respective measurement images ……”).
Regarding 2/1, image forming unit (in 101, Fig. 1) includes (see claim 8 of Takemura)
a photoreceptor (Fig. 1),
a charging unit configured to charge the photoreceptor (Fig. 1),
an exposure unit configured to expose the photoreceptor charged
by the charging unit, to form an electrostatic latent image (Fig. 1), and
a developing unit configured to develop the electrostatic latent
image on the photoreceptor with use of toner (Fig. 1),
the first image forming condition (“first image forming condition” in claim 8) is a first charging voltage (“first charging voltage” in claim 8) used when the charging unit charges the photoreceptor (Fig. 1, claim 8), and
the second image forming condition (“second image forming condition” in claim 8) is a second charging voltage (“second charging voltage” in claim 8) different from the first charging voltage and used when the charging unit charges the photoreceptor (end of claim 8 of Takemura).
Regarding claim 3/1, the image forming unit (in 101 in Fig. 1) includes (see claim 9 of Takemura)
a photoreceptor (the claim 9),
a charging unit configured to charge the photoreceptor (the claim 9),
an exposure unit configured to expose the photoreceptor charged by the charging unit, to form an electrostatic latent image (the claim 9), and
a developing unit configured to develop the electrostatic latent
image on the photoreceptor with use of toner (claim 9),
the first image forming condition (“first image forming condition” in claim 9) is a first exposure amount (the “first intensity of exposure light of the exposure unit” times an inherent exposure time duration) used when the exposure unit exposes the photoreceptor, and
the second image forming condition (“second image forming condition” in claim 9) is a second exposure amount (the “second intensity of exposure light of the exposure unit” times an inherent exposure time duration) different from the first exposure amount and used when the exposure unit exposes the photoreceptor.
Regarding claim 4/1,the image forming unit (in 101 in Fig. 1) includes (see claim 10 of Takemura)
a photoreceptor,
a charging unit configured to charge the photoreceptor,
an exposure unit configured to expose the photoreceptor charged
by the charging unit, to form an electrostatic latent image, and
a developing unit configured to develop the electrostatic latent
image on the photoreceptor with use of toner,
the first image forming condition (“first image forming condition” in the claim 10) is a first developing voltage (“first developing bias”) used when the developing unit develops the electrostatic latent image, and
the second image forming condition (“second image forming condition” in the claim 10) is a second developing voltage (“second developing bias” in the claim 10) different from the first developing voltage and used when the developing unit develops the electrostatic latent image.
Regarding claim 5/1, Takemura further discloses (see claims 12 and 13, and para 0040-0042 and 0047) a gradation correction unit (316) configured to perform gradation correction on image data based on a gradation correction condition, wherein the gradation correction condition is not the image forming condition, and the image forming unit forms the image based on the image data resulting from the gradation correction performed by the gradation correction unit.
Regarding claim 6/5, in a case where the image is to be formed based on the first image forming condition, the gradation correction unit performs gradation
correction on the image data based on a first gradation correction condition, and in a case where the image is to be formed based on the second image forming condition, the gradation correction unit performs gradation correction on the image data based on a second gradation correction condition different from the first gradation correction condition (para 0040-0042 and 0047, note in 0040 that the gradation correction table corresponds to a LUT, which means there are different gradation correction conditions for different corresponding image forming conditions).
Claim Rejection – 35 U.S.C. 103
5. 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.
6. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemura (US 2017/0038719 A1).
Regarding claim 7/5, the gradation correction unit (316) of Takemura is discussed above (for claims 5/1 and 6/5).
Takemura does not explicitly disclose using a common gradation correction condition as claimed. However, using a common gradation correction condition for the situations claimed would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since such approach would simply the gradation correction condition assigning process compared to using different gradation correction conditions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a common gradation correction condition as claimed.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHEUKFAN LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7407. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10 a.m. - 6 p.m.
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, BENNY TIEU can be reached at (571)272-7490. 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.
/CHEUKFAN LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Prosecution Insights