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 .
Drawings
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 “member to be cleaned is one of a charging member, a transfer member, a fixing member, or a transporting member” of claims 8 and 9 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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218).
Regarding claim 1, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1-3, #2b); and a cleaning blade, comprising a contact portion (fig.2, edge of #2h contacts #2b) that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned (fig.2, #2h contacting #2b) and cleans the member to be cleaned and that is provided with both end portions in a longitudinal direction protruding from the member to be cleaned (see fig.3, width #2h & #2b; or one of the listed apparatus in fig.5B); wherein a contact angle of the cleaning blade to the member to be cleaned is 18° or more and 50° or less (see contact angle in fig.2 between #2h and #2b).
Regarding claim 2, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) teach an image forming apparatus wherein a protrusion length of the member to be cleaned protruding at an end portion of the cleaning blade is 0.1 mm or more, wherein the protrusion length is measured in the longitudinal direction of the cleaning blade (fig.3, difference between 363.5 mm and 362 mm results in an end protrusion of 0.75 mm, greater than 0.1 mm; same with fig.5B, second apparatus, third apparatus; para.0059-0062).
Regarding claim 3, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) teach an image forming apparatus wherein the protrusion length of the member to be cleaned protruding at the end portion of the cleaning blade is 1.0 mm or more (fig.5B, second apparatus, difference between 363.5 mm and 355 mm results in a difference on one end of 4.25 mm; para.0059-0060).
Regarding claim 7, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) teach a process cartridge (fig.1, #2; para.0023) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1-3, #2b); and a cleaning blade that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned (fig.2, #2h contacting #2b) and cleans the member to be cleaned and that is provided with both end portions in a longitudinal direction protruding from the member to be cleaned (see fig.3, width #2h & #2b), wherein the process cartridge is detachably attached to an image forming apparatus (fig.1).
While the Office contends that the depicted configuration may have a contact angle that would fall within the claimed range, reference is silent thereto.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) (of a similar configuration to that of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) ) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1-2A, #2); and a cleaning blade that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned (fig.1-2A, #9 contacting #2) and cleans the member to be cleaned; wherein a contact angle of the cleaning blade to the member to be cleaned is 18° or more and 50° or less (see contact angle in fig.2A, #α; col.5, ln.14-16).
If the teachings of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) are not sufficiently convincing, it would have at least been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to set the contact angle of the cleaning blade of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) to be in the range claimed as in Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) in order to effect a good cleaning operation (col.5, ln.14-16).
However, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) fail to teach a surface layer of the contact portion of the cleaning blade having a layer impregnated with diamond-like carbon or a diamond-like carbon layer.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) teaches an image forming apparatus (fig.1) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1, #12); and a cleaning blade (fig.1, #20), comprising a contact portion that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned and cleans the member to be cleaned (see fig.1, end of #20 contacts #12), wherein a contact angle of the cleaning blade to the member to be cleaned is 18° or more and 50° or less (para.0175-0176) and wherein a surface layer of the contact portion of the cleaning blade has a layer impregnated with diamond-like carbon or a diamond-like carbon layer (para.0010&0012-0013).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cleaning blade coating of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) by using the coating material as in Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) because it is a conventionally known coating for the purpose that results in a low friction coefficient and excellent wear resistance (para.0012-0013) and is known to be used to prevent chattering and poor cleaning performance (para.0009-0010).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nakayama et al. (US 5,765,088).
Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) teach all of the limitations of claim 1, upon which claims 4 and 6 depend.
However, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) fail to teach specifics about the cleaning blade’s composition or contact pressure.
Regarding claim 4, Nakayama et al. (US 5,765,088) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) similar to that of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1, #11); and a cleaning blade that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned (fig.1, #611 contacting #11) and cleans the member to be cleaned wherein a line contact pressure of the cleaning blade to the member to be cleaned is 1.5 gf/mm or more and 4.0 gf/mm or less (col.21, ln.25-26).
Regarding claim 6, Nakayama et al. (US 5,765,088) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) similar to that of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1, #11); and a cleaning blade that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned (fig.1, #611 contacting #11) and cleans the member to be cleaned wherein a Young's modulus of the contact portion of the cleaning blade that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned is 5 MPa or more and 30 MPa or less (col.21, ln.28-30: 30 to 120 kg/cm2 is the equivalent of 2.94 MPa to 11.77 MPa).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the blade of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) to be configured with the properties found in Nakayama et al. (US 5,765,088) so as to maintain sufficient cleaning performance while preventing blade edge breakage, wear of the blade and wear of the member to be cleaned (col.21, ln.24-35).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kojima et al. (US Pub.2006/0216084).
Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) teach all of the limitations of claim 1, upon which claim 8 depends.
However, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) fail to teach the cleaning blade being used for anything other than a photoreceptor.
Regarding claim 8, Kojima et al. (US Pub.2006/0216084) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.3, #31); and a cleaning blade (fig.3, #342), comprising a contact portion that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned and cleans the member to be cleaned (fig.3, #342a), wherein the member to be cleaned is one of a charging member, a transfer member, a fixing member, or a transporting member (para.0077).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kuribayashi et al. (US 5,438,400) and in view of Sugimoto (US Pub.2007/0078218) by using the cleaning blade configuration for other members to be cleaned in the image forming apparatus as in Kojima et al. (US Pub.2006/0216084) because it is known in the art that a blade usable for a photoreceptor/image carrier can also be used for cleaning other parts of the apparatus (para.0077). As such, the claim limitations would be easily arrived at by one of ordinary skill in the art without undue experimentation.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) in view of Kojima et al. (US Pub.2006/0216084).
Regarding claim 9, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.1-3, #2b); and a cleaning blade (fig.2, edge of #2h contacts #2b) that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned (fig.2, #2h contacting #2b) and cleans the member to be cleaned and that is provided with both end portions in a longitudinal direction protruding from the member to be cleaned (see fig.3, width #2h & #2b; or one of the listed apparatus in fig.5B).
However, Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) fail to teach the cleaning blade being used for anything other than a photoreceptor.
Regarding claim 9, Kojima et al. (US Pub.2006/0216084) teach an image forming apparatus (fig.1) comprising: a member to be cleaned (fig.3, #31); and a cleaning blade (fig.3, #342) that is brought into contact with the member to be cleaned and cleans the member to be cleaned (fig.3, #342a), wherein the member to be cleaned is one of a charging member, a transfer member, a fixing member, or a transporting member (para.0077).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Aso et al. (US Pub.2009/0297239) by using the cleaning blade configuration for other members to be cleaned in the image forming apparatus as in Kojima et al. (US Pub.2006/0216084) because it is known in the art that a blade usable for a photoreceptor/image carrier can also be used for cleaning other parts of the apparatus (para.0077). As such, the claim limitations would be easily arrived at by one of ordinary skill in the art without undue experimentation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4 and 6-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on solely the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA K ROTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2154. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30AM-3:30 PM.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached on 571-272-3555. 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.
/LKR/
10/1/2025
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights