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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1, lines 8 and 12, recites, “…while the printing being performed.” An example correction is provided, herein: “…while the printing is being performed.”
Claim 12, lines 7 and 10, recites, “…while the printing being performed.” An example correction is provided, herein: “…while the printing is being performed.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsushita (JP 2019098595 A). All textual citations and paragraph numbers refer to the attached machine translation.
Regarding claim 1, Matsushita teaches a printing apparatus comprising: a printing unit configured to perform printing on a medium at a printing position in the printing unit (figs. 1-3, sheet 1, recording head 18, ¶[0022]); a conveyance unit configured to convey the medium along a conveyance path (fig. 2a-d, 4, transport roller 14, nip roller 15, ¶[0026], ¶[0040]-[0045]); a winding unit configured to wind up the medium (figs. 2, 5-6, spool member 2, paper tube 27, ¶[0025], [0040]-[0045]); and a processor configured to determine whether a leading end of the medium reaches a predetermined range during conveyance of the medium while the printing being performed, determine whether the leading end of the medium reaches a predetermined position disposed downstream relative to an upstream end of the predetermined range along the conveyance path during the conveyance of the medium while the printing being performed, with the predetermined position corresponding to a position of the leading end of the medium when a break of a printed image on the medium reaches the printing position in the printing unit, and stop the conveyance of the medium in response to determining that the leading end of the medium reaches the predetermined position after determining that the leading end of the medium reaches the predetermined range (figs. 2a-d, 9, first positions L1a, L2a, second positions L1b, L2b, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 2, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to stop the conveyance when executing a job requiring winding in the winding unit, and the processor is configured not to stop the conveyance when executing a job not requiring the winding in the winding unit (fig. 9, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 3, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the stops processor is configured to stop the conveyance when executing a job requiring winding in the winding unit, and the processor is configured not to stop the conveyance when executing a job not requiring the winding in the winding unit (fig. 9, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 4, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to stop the conveyance when a user sets that a stop operation to stop the conveyance by the processor is required, and the processor is configured not to stop the conveyance when the user sets that the stop operation to stop the conveyance by the processor is not required (fig. 9, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076], particularly step S913 and ¶[0056]).
Regarding claim 5, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when the break reaching the printing position is not present while the leading end of the medium is within a predetermined stopping range, the processor is configured to reduce a conveyance speed of the medium by the conveyance unit (fig. 9, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 6, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 5, and further teaches a controller wherein first and second stopping positions can be set arbitrarily (figs. 2, 9, first position L1a, second position L1b, ¶[0042]).
Further, the claim does not recite any additional structural limitations beyond those recited in claims 1 and 5. The recitation of, “a downstream end of the predetermined stopping range is an installation floor surface,” amounts to no more than a recitation of functional language or a desired mode of operation of the device. Additionally, based on the disclosure and the other claim language of claims 1 and 5, it is assumed that the “installation floor” is not intended to be a positive recitation of the claim, therefore, the Examiner is interpreting this language such that it amounts to functional language describing the operation of the printing apparatus. From the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure § 2114:
"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original).
A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. Matsushita teaches a printing apparatus comprising all the structure recited in claims 1 and 5, and would therefore be capable of operating according to the recitations of intended use of claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 5, wherein when the break reaching the printing position is not present while the leading end of the medium is within the predetermined stopping range, the processor is configured to reduce the conveyance speed at a timing when the leading end of the medium reaches the upstream end of the predetermined range (fig. 9, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 8, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the break is an area in which printing is not performed over an entire area in a main scanning direction (fig. 9, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 9, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the break is located between a lower end of a printed image in a first printing page and an upper end of a printed image in a second printing page (fig. 7, marking printing 701, area 702, ¶[0079]).
Regarding claim 10, Matsushita teaches the printing apparatus according to claim 8, wherein when at least two printed images are disposed to be separated from each other in a conveyance direction of the medium in a same page, the break is located between the at least two printed images (fig. 7, marking printing 701, area 702, ¶[0079]).
Regarding claim 12, Matsushita teaches a method for producing a printed matter by performing printing on a medium using a printing apparatus, the printing apparatus including a printing unit configured to perform printing on the medium at a printing position in the printing unit (figs. 1-3, sheet 1, recording head 18, ¶[0022]), a conveyance unit configured to convey the medium along a conveyance path (fig. 2a-d, 4, transport roller 14, nip roller 15, ¶[0026], ¶[0040]-[0045]), and a winding unit configured to wind up the medium (figs. 2, 5-6, spool member 2, paper tube 27, ¶[0025], [0040]-[0045]), the method comprising: determining whether a leading end of the medium reaches a predetermined range during conveyance of the medium while the printing being performed, determining whether the leading end of the medium reaches a predetermined position disposed downstream relative to an upstream end of the predetermined range along the conveyance path during the conveyance of the medium while the printing being performed, with the predetermined position corresponding to a position of the leading end of the medium when a break of a printed image on the medium reaches the printing position in the printing unit, and stopping the conveyance of the medium in response to determining that the leading end of the medium reaches the predetermined position a printed image reaching a printing position in the printing unit after determining that the leading end of the medium reaches a fixing work the predetermined range (figs. 2, 9, first positions L1a, L2a, second positions L1b, L2b, steps S901-S917, ¶[0049]-[0076]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the printing apparatus of claim 11, particularly including and in combination with, when the processor stops the conveyance, lower end processing is executed on a printed image adjacent upstream to the break, and upper end processing is executed on a printed image adjacent downstream to the break.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8 of Applicant’s Remarks, filed December 12, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-12 under Hamano have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Matsushita, as detailed above in the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS RAY KNIEF whose telephone number is (703)756-5733. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM - 5 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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 5712722149. 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.
/TRK/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853