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 .
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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: wound member in claims 1, 8; restriction portion in claim 4; downstream-side attachment portion in claim 5; upstream-side attachment portion in claims 8-9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-18 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.
The last paragraph of claim 1 recites the phrase “a portion of the wound member on a downstream side in the rotation direction”. This is indefinite because there is no reference point from which downstream or upstream may be determined. On a downstream side of what, exactly?
Claim 8 recites the phrase “a portion of the wound member on an upstream side in the rotation direction”, and is indefinite for similar reasons as claim 1.
Claims 2-7 and 9-18 are rendered indefinite due to their dependence upon claim 1 and/or claim 8.
For examination purposes, the upstream/downstream sides will be interpreted as best as one is able.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the recording drum" in the 5th line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, this limitation will be interpreted as --the recording medium--.
Note: the following rejections are based upon the claims as best understood by Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyamoto et al. (US 2022/0107591; “Miyamoto”).
Regarding claim 1, Miyamoto discloses a fixing device 50/51 (Fig. 1 [0033]) comprising:
a fixing roller 51 (Fig. 1 [0033]); and
a fixing drum 50 that rotates in a rotation direction (counterclockwise in Fig. 1) with a recording medium P having an image formed thereon pinched between the fixing roller 51 and the fixing drum 50, to fix the image onto the recording drum (i.e., recording medium) (Fig. 1 [0033]),
the fixing drum 50 including:
a drum body having a recessed portion 502 formed on an outer peripheral surface thereof (Fig. 1 [0027]), and
a sheet-shaped wound member 90 that is wound around the outer peripheral surface and is attached to the drum body in a state in which a portion 901 of the wound member 90 on a downstream side in the rotation direction is bent radially inward of the drum body at a corner portion of the recessed portion (Fig. 3 [0029]; note that “the present disclosure may be applied to a jacket wound around the fixing cylinder 50” [0057], and there are two portions 901 bent radially inward of the drum body at two corner portions, one of which is downstream and the other one is upstream, of the recessed portion).
Regarding claim 10, Miyamoto discloses an image forming apparatus 10 (Fig. 1 [0021]) comprising: a transfer device 40 that transfers an image onto a recording medium P (Fig. 1 [0031]); and the fixing device 50/51 according to claim 1 that fixes the image transferred onto the recording medium by the transfer device to the recording medium P (Fig. 1 [0032-0033]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-5, 8-9, 11-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2022/0107591) in view of Tanaka et al. (US 2022/0075294; “Tanaka”).
Regarding claim 2, Miyamoto discloses the fixing device according to claim 1, wherein the portion on the downstream side in the rotation direction includes: a first bent portion that is bent radially inward of the drum body at the corner portion of the recessed portion (Fig. 3; a first bent portion exists on both corners of the recessed portion).
Miyamoto fails to disclose a second bent portion that is bent on a radially inner side with respect to the first bent portion; and an attached portion that is provided on a side opposite to the first bent portion with respect to the second bent portion, and is attached to the drum body.
Tanaka teaches a similar sheet-shaped wound member 60 attached to drum body 52/58 (Fig. 2 [0039]) in a state in which a portion 62B of the wound member 60 on a downstream side in the rotation direction is bent radially inward of the drum body 52/58 at a corner portion (see annotated partial Fig. 2 below) of a recessed portion 54 ([0039, 0053]; also note [0095] that states “the extension portion 62A and the extension portion 62B of the base layer 62 may both be attached to the transfer drum body 52 via the inner adjustment mechanism 70,” i.e., the same structures may be applied at both an upstream side and a downstream side of the drum body).
Tanaka further teaches wherein the portion on the downstream side in the rotation direction includes: a first bent portion that is bent radially inward of the drum body 52/58 at the corner portion of the recessed portion; a second bent portion that is bent on a radially inner side with respect to the first bent portion; and an attached portion that is provided on a side opposite to the first bent portion with respect to the second bent portion, and is attached to the drum body 52/58 via an adjustment mechanism 70 (see annotated partial Fig. 2 above and [0054]).
Based on the teachings of Tanaka, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fixing device of Miyamoto to include a second bent portion that is bent on a radially inner side with respect to the first bent portion and an attached portion that is provided on a side opposite to the first bent portion with respect to the second bent portion, and is attached to the drum body. One would have been motivated to make this modification in order to adjust the tension in the circumferential direction of the base layer relative to the drum body so that it can correspond to outer diameter variation in the axial direction of the drum body (Tanaka [0057, 0061]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Miyamoto teaches the fixing device according to claim 2, wherein the second bent portion is bent, on the radially inner side with respect to the first bent portion, from a direction toward the radially inner side toward the downstream side in the rotation direction (see annotated partial Fig. 2 of Tanaka above).
Regarding claim 4, modified Miyamoto teaches the fixing device according to claim 3, further comprising a restriction portion 72 that restricts extension of the second bent portion by pinching the portion on the downstream side in the rotation direction between the restriction portion and the drum body (Tanaka Figs. 2-3 [0054-0055]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Miyamoto teaches the fixing device according to claim 3, further comprising a downstream-side attachment portion 90 that attaches the attached portion to a bottom surface (near58A) on the radially inner side of the recessed portion (Tanaka Fig. 5 [0056, 0060]).
Regarding claim 8, Miyamoto discloses the fixing device according to claim 1, further comprising an upstream-side attachment portion (the other of the two portions 901 bent radially inward; Fig. 3) that attaches a portion of the wound member 90 on an upstream side in the rotation direction to the drum body (both portions 901 are fixed to wall surfaces; [0029])
Miyamoto does not explicitly disclose the structure of the upstream-side attachment portion and does not disclose the upstream-side attachment portion movable in a pulling direction in which the portion on the upstream side in the rotation direction is pulled toward the upstream side in the rotation direction.
Tanaka teaches a similar sheet-shaped wound member 60 attached to drum body 52/58 (Fig. 2 [0039]) in a state in which a portion 62B of the wound member 60 on a downstream side in the rotation direction is bent radially inward of the drum body 52/58 at a corner portion (see annotated partial Fig. 2 above) of a recessed portion 54 ([0039, 0053]; also note [0095] that states “the extension portion 62A and the extension portion 62B of the base layer 62 may both be attached to the transfer drum body 52 via the inner adjustment mechanism 70,” i.e., the same structures may be applied at both an upstream side and a downstream side of the drum body).
Tanaka further teaches an upstream-side attachment portion 70/90 that attaches a portion of the wound member 60 on an upstream side in the rotation direction to the drum body 52/58, and is movable in a pulling direction in which the portion on the upstream side in the rotation direction is pulled toward the upstream side in the rotation direction (Fig. 5 [0058-0061]).
Based on the teachings of Tanaka, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fixing device of Miyamoto to include an upstream-side attachment portion that attaches a portion of the wound member on an upstream side in the rotation direction to the drum body, and is movable in a pulling direction in which the portion on the upstream side in the rotation direction is pulled toward the upstream side in the rotation direction. One would have been motivated to make this modification in order to adjust the tension in the circumferential direction of the base layer relative to the drum body so that it can correspond to outer diameter variation in the axial direction of the drum body (Tanaka [0057, 0061]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Miyamoto teaches the fixing device according to claim 8, wherein a plurality of the upstream-side attachment portions are arranged in an axial direction of the drum body (Tanaka Fig. 3 [0061]).
Regarding claims 11-14 and 17-18, Miyamoto discloses an image forming apparatus 10 (Fig. 1 [0021]) comprising: a transfer device 40 that transfers an image onto a recording medium P (Fig. 1 [0031]); and the fixing device 50/51 according to claims 2-5 and 8-9, respectively, that fixes the image transferred onto the recording medium by the transfer device to the recording medium P (Fig. 1 [0032-0033]).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2022/0107591) in view of Tanaka (US 2022/0075294) as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Nagler et al. (US 2007/0084371; “Nagler”).
Regarding claims 6-7, modified Miyamoto teaches the fixing device according to claim 2, but fails to teach wherein at least one of the first bent portion and the second bent portion is bent at an acute angle (claim 6) or wherein both of the first bent portion and the second bent portion are bent at an acute angle (claim 7).
Nagler teaches a printer having a wound member 301 (Fig. 11) attached to a drum body 100 (Fig. 2) ([0072-0073, 0110]). The wound member has a bent portion bent at an acute angle (Fig. 11 [0110]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to bend at least one of the first bent portion and the second bent portion is bent at an acute angle or to bend both of the first bent portion and the second bent portion at an acute angle. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. In this instance, the predictable results would be an effective attachment between the wound member and the drum body.
Regarding claims 15-16, Miyamoto discloses an image forming apparatus 10 (Fig. 1 [0021]) comprising: a transfer device 40 that transfers an image onto a recording medium P (Fig. 1 [0031]); and the fixing device 50/51 according to claims 5-6, respectively, that fixes the image transferred onto the recording medium by the transfer device to the recording medium P (Fig. 1 [0032-0033]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLA J THERRIEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am - 4 pm EST.
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 at (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.
/CARLA J THERRIEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights