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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-4 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murase (US 2022/0377192) in view of Shiota (US 2020/0177752).
Regarding Claim 1, Murase teaches a reading device (Paragraph 2), comprising:
a placement section configured to hold a plurality of documents (Element 71 and paragraph 29, wherein a plurality of documents can be placed on the document setting portion);
a feed roller configured to feed the documents from the placement section (Element 72 and paragraph 29, wherein the documents are fed from the document setting portion);
a separation section configured to separate the documents fed by the feed roller (Paragraph 29, wherein the conveying rollers are in a pair that would move one document at a time, therefore would correspond to the separation section);
a reading section configured to scan the documents being transported in a transport direction (Paragraphs 26 and 29 and Element 20, wherein there is a reading unit to read the documents);
a control section (Element 6) configured to:
perform a skew judgment that a particular document is skewed based on an image of the particular document scanned by the reading section (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50);
determine a transport error of the documents (Element 6 and paragraphs 55 and 64, wherein the inclination is detected, which corresponds to a transport error)
Murase does not teach determine a transport error of the documents when the particular document is determined to be skewed and the detection section detects one or more documents remaining in the placement section; and
in response to the transport error, cause the transport of documents to end leaving the one or more remaining documents in the placement section; and
when the particular document is determined to be skewed and the detection section does not detect a document remaining in the placement section, continue transport of the particular document to discharge the particular document.
Shiota does teach determine a transport error of the documents when the particular document is determined to be skewed and the detection section detects one or more documents remaining in the placement section (Paragraph 100, wherein the documents can be detected to be in the placement section corresponding to the two-dimensional sensor and a skew is detected); and
in response to the transport error, cause the transport of documents to end leaving the one or more remaining documents in the placement section (Paragraph 100, wherein transport of the documents is stopped); and
when the particular document is determined to be skewed and the detection section does not detect a document remaining in the placement section, continue transport of the particular document to discharge the particular document (Paragraph 100, wherein the document can be continued to be transported when no detection is made of the two-dimensional sensor).
Murase and Shiota are combinable because they both deal with correcting skew in scanning of documents.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Murase with the teachings of Shiota for the purpose of more appropriately detecting the state of the medium present (Shiota: Paragraph 8).
Regarding Claim 2, Murase further teaches wherein the control section performs the judgment that a particular document is skewed based on an image of a tip end region of the particular document scanned by the reading section (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50).
Regarding Claim 3, Murase further teaches wherein the control section is configured to
calculate, based on the image of the tip end region of the particular document, a tilt angle of the particular document with respect to a scanning direction and a tip end distance in the scanning direction from the side edge portion of the particular document to the nip region (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the angle of inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50) and
perform the judgment based on the tilt angle and the tip end distance (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50).
Regarding Claim 4, Murase further teaches wherein the control section is configured to correct the tilt angle using an amount by which the tilt angle of the particular document is estimated to change during transportation (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the angle of inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50).
Regarding Claim 7, Murase further teaches the control section is configured to
obtain a position of a rear end of the particular document based on an image scanned by the reading section (Paragraph 63, wherein the region corresponding to the end of the document is detected) and
perform the judgment that the preceding document is skewed based on the position of the rear end of the particular document (Paragraphs 63 and 64, wherein the angle of inclination is adjusted to correct the skew accordingly).
Regarding Claim 8, Murase further teaches the control section is configured to obtain a width of the particular document from an image of the preceding document scanned by the reading section and, when the width is determined to be less than or equal to a threshold value, the control section performs the judgment that the particular document is skewed (Paragraph 107, wherein the edge is determined of the document based on the shadow and the skew is adjusted according to the threshold).
Regarding Claim 9, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 10, Murase teaches a reading device (Paragraph 2), comprising:
a placement section on which a plurality of documents is placed (Element 71 and paragraph 29, wherein a plurality of documents can be placed on the document setting portion);
a feed roller that feeds the documents from the placement section (Element 72 and paragraph 29, wherein the documents are fed from the document setting portion);
a separation section that separates the documents being fed by the feed roller (Paragraph 29, wherein the conveying rollers are in a pair that would move one document at a time, therefore would correspond to the separation section);
a reading section that scans the documents being transported in a transport direction (Paragraphs 26 and 29 and Element 20, wherein there is a reading unit to read the documents);
a control section that determines a transport error of the documents (Element 6 and paragraphs 55 and 64, wherein the inclination is detected, which corresponds to a transport error); and
wherein
the control section
performs a skew judgment based on an image of a tip end region of a particular document scanned by the reading section, the image of a top end region not including a rear end of the particular document, and a size of the image of the tip end region in the transport direction being smaller than a size of the particular document in the transport direction (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50),
the skew judgment determining whether a side edge portion of the particular document is displaced into a nip region sandwiched between the feed roller and the separation section (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50).
Murase does not teach a detection section that detects the documents that are placed on the placement section; and
determines that a transport error has occurred when the side edge portion of the particular document is determined to be displaced into the nip region and the detection section detects one or more documents in the placement section;
in response to the transport error, causes transport of documents to end leaving the one or more remaining documents in the placement section; and
when the side edge portion of the particular document is determined to be displaced into the nip region and the detection section does not detect a document remaining in the placement section, continue transport of the particular document to discharge the particular document.
Shiota teaches a detection section that detects the documents that are placed on the placement section (Paragraph 72, wherein the two-dimensional sensor detects documents in the placement section); and
determines that a transport error has occurred when the side edge portion of the particular document is determined to be displaced into the nip region and the detection section detects one or more documents in the placement section (Paragraph 100, wherein the documents can be detected to be in the placement section corresponding to the two-dimensional sensor and a skew is detected);
in response to the transport error, causes transport of documents to end leaving the one or more remaining documents in the placement section (Paragraph 100, wherein transport of the documents is stopped); and
when the side edge portion of the particular document is determined to be displaced into the nip region and the detection section does not detect a document remaining in the placement section, continue transport of the particular document to discharge the particular document (Paragraph 100, wherein the document can be continued to be transported when no detection is made of the two-dimensional sensor).
Murase and Shiota are combinable because they both deal with correcting skew in scanning of documents.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Murase with the teachings of Shiota for the purpose of more appropriately detecting the state of the medium present (Shiota: Paragraph 8).
Regarding Claim 11, Murase further teaches wherein the control section
calculates, based on the image of the tip end region of the preceding document, a tilt angle of the preceding document with respect to a scanning direction and a tip end distance in the scanning direction from the side edge portion of the preceding document to the nip region (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the angle of inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50) and
performs the skew judgment based on the tilt angle and the tip end distance (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50).
Regarding Claim 12, Murase further teaches wherein the control section corrects the tilt angle using an amount by which the tilt angle of the preceding document is estimated to changes during transportation (Paragraphs 93-95, wherein the angle of inclination is corrected based on the image data. The angle is determined based on the sheet edge being displaced in the nip, paragraph 50).
Regarding Claim 15, Murase further teaches the control section
obtains a position of a rear end of the preceding document based on an image scanned by the reading section (Paragraph 63, wherein the region corresponding to the end of the document is detected) and
performs the skew judgment based on the position of the rear end of the preceding document (Paragraphs 63 and 64, wherein the angle of inclination is adjusted to correct the skew accordingly).
Regarding Claim 16, Murase further teaches the control section obtains a width of the preceding document from an image of the preceding document scanned by the reading section and, when the width is determined to be less than or equal to a threshold value, the control section performs the skew judgment (Paragraph 107, wherein the edge is determined of the document based on the shadow and the skew is adjusted according to the threshold).
Regarding Claim 17, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 10 above.
Claim(s) 5, 6, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murase (US 2022/0377192) in view of Shiota (US 2020/0177752) further in view of Suzuki (US 2012/0314267).
Regarding Claim 5, Murase in view of Shiota does not teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document, wherein
the control section is configured to
obtain a document length, which is a length of the particular document in the transport direction from a tip end to the rear end of the particular document, based on an image of a tip end region of the particular document scanned by the reading section and a detection result of the rear end detection section and
perform the judgment based on the document length.
Suzuki does teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document (Paragraph 73, wherein the length of the document is determined), wherein
the control section
the control section is configured to
obtain a document length, which is a length of the particular document in the transport direction from a tip end to the rear end of the particular document, based on an image of a tip end region of the particular document scanned by the reading section and a detection result of the rear end detection section (Paragraph 73, wherein the length of the document is determined) and
perform the judgment based on the document length (Paragraph 141, wherein the skew is corrected taking into account the length).
Murase and Suzuki are combinable because they both deal with correcting skew in scanning of documents.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Murase in view of Shiota with the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of ensuring proper correction of the skew and avoiding multifeed issues (Suzuki: Paragraphs 139 and 141).
Regarding Claim 6, Murase in view of Shiota does not teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document, wherein
the control section performs the skew judgment at a timing when the rear end detection section detects the rear end of the particular document.
Suzuki does teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document (Paragraph 73, wherein the length of the document is determined), wherein
the control section performs the skew judgment at a timing when the rear end detection section detects the rear end of the particular document (Paragraph 141, wherein the skew is corrected taking into account the length).
Murase and Suzuki are combinable because they both deal with correcting skew in scanning of documents.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Murase in view of Shiota with the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of ensuring proper correction of the skew and avoiding multifeed issues (Suzuki: Paragraphs 139 and 141).
Regarding Claim 13, Murase in view of Shiota does not teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document, wherein
the control section
obtains a document length, which is a length of the preceding document in the transport direction from a tip end to the rear end of the preceding document, based on an image of a tip end region of the preceding document scanned by the reading section and a detection result of the rear end detection section and
performs the skew judgment based on the document length.
Suzuki does teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document (Paragraph 73, wherein the length of the document is determined), wherein
the control section
obtains a document length, which is a length of the preceding document in the transport direction from a tip end to the rear end of the preceding document, based on an image of a tip end region of the preceding document scanned by the reading section and a detection result of the rear end detection section (Paragraph 73, wherein the length of the document is determined) and
performs the skew judgment based on the document length (Paragraph 141, wherein the skew is corrected taking into account the length).
Murase and Suzuki are combinable because they both deal with correcting skew in scanning of documents.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Murase in view of Shiota with the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of ensuring proper correction of the skew and avoiding multifeed issues (Suzuki: Paragraphs 139 and 141).
Regarding Claim 14, Murase in view of Shiota does not teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document, wherein
the control section performs the skew judgment at a timing when the rear end detection section detects the rear end of the preceding document.
Suzuki does teach a rear end detection section that is provided between the feed roller and the reading section in the transport direction and that detects a rear end of the document (Paragraph 73, wherein the length of the document is determined), wherein
the control section performs the skew judgment at a timing when the rear end detection section detects the rear end of the preceding document (Paragraph 141, wherein the skew is corrected taking into account the length).
Murase and Suzuki are combinable because they both deal with correcting skew in scanning of documents.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Murase in view of Shiota with the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of ensuring proper correction of the skew and avoiding multifeed issues (Suzuki: Paragraphs 139 and 141).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS PACHOL whose telephone number is (571)270-3433. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8-4.
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, George Eng can be reached at 571-272-7495. 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.
/NICHOLAS PACHOL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699
Prosecution Insights