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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 29 December 2025 is acknowledged.
Note: In a telephone conversation on 23 January 2026, Applicant’s representative, Russell E. Fowler II, indicated that Applicant further elected Species I(B) (claim 7), since that election was not included in the Response to Restriction Requirement.
Claims 6 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention/Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 29 December 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 February 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, “ink container only: and” should be replaced by -- ink container only; and – [i.e. replace a colon with a semicolon]. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zoltner et al. (US 2013/0182267 – hereinafter Zoltner.)
Regarding claim 1,
Zoltner discloses an aqueous inkjet printer [100 in fig. 5] comprising:
a plurality of printheads [122/124/126/128 in fig. 5; paragraphs 0021-0025];
a plurality of aqueous ink supplies [154/156/158/160 in fig. 1; paragraph 0026; note that the last sentence of paragraph 0024 teaches the invention being used to eject aqueous ink], each printhead [printhead 140 in the example seen in fig. 1] being fluidly connected to at least one of the ink supplies in the plurality of ink supplies [as seen in fig. 1] and at least some of the ink supplies storing ink having a different color of ink than ink stored in at least some other ink supplies [paragraphs 0026 and 0029];
a first purged ink container [164 in fig. 1] that is fluidly connected to at least some of the printheads in the plurality of printheads [as seen in fig. 1] to receive different colors of aqueous ink purged from a manifold in the printheads connected to the first purged ink container [paragraphs 0030 and 0033]; and
at least one printhead [144 in fig. 1] in the plurality of printheads that is configured to eject black colored ink [paragraph 0028], the at least one printhead configured to eject black colored ink is fluidly connected to the first purged ink container to receive process black ink from the first purged ink container [as seen in fig. 1; paragraphs 0036-0037.]
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.
Claims 2-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zoltner in view of Slotto et al. (US Patent 8,317,309 – hereinafter Slotto.)
Regarding claim 2,
Zoltner discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above and further discloses the aqueous inkjet printer further comprising: a second purged ink container that is fluidly connected to a receptacle that receives ink purged through inkjets in the printheads [it is implicit that more than one purged ink container is included from paragraph 0042, which recites “one or more printheads are configured with a reclaimed ink reservoir to collect one or more colored inks from a printhead.”]
However, Zoltner fails to expressly disclose the second purged ink container being configured for removal from the inkjet printer to enable discarding of the ink purged through the inkjets in the printhead.
Slotto discloses an inkjet printer [10 in fig. 1] comprising: a plurality of printheads [col. 3, lines 55-60]; a plurality of ink supplies [22/24/26/28 in figs. 1 and 3], each printhead being fluidly connected to at least one of the ink supplies in the plurality of ink supplies and at least some of the ink supplies storing ink having a different color of ink than ink stored in at least some other ink supplies [col. 3, lines 38-42]; a purged ink container that is fluidly connected to a receptacle that receives ink purged through inkjets in the printheads [as seen in fig. 5], and that is configured for removal from the inkjet printer to enable discarding of the ink purged through the inkjets in the printhead [col. 1, lines 51-53 and col. 6, lines 22-46 teach that it is well-known at the time of the invention.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Zoltner invention to include means for removal of a purged ink container from the inkjet printer as taught by Slotto for the purpose of being able to discard the ink purged through the inkjets in the printhead when necessary, extending the printer’s lifespan and maintaining print quality.
Regarding claim 3,
In the obvious combination, Zoltner further discloses the aqueous inkjet printer further comprising:
a first valve [not shown but mentioned in paragraph 0037] fluidly connected to a supply of black ink in the plurality of ink supplies, to the first purged ink container, and to the at least one printhead that ejects black colored ink [paragraph 0037]; and
a controller [190 in fig. 1] operatively connected to the first valve, the controller being configured to:
operate the first valve to provide the at least one printhead that ejects black colored ink black colored ink from the supply of black ink and process black ink from the first purged ink container selectively [paragraph 0037.]
Regarding claim 4,
In the obvious combination, Zoltner further discloses the aqueous inkjet printer further comprising:
a second valve fluidly connected to the supply of black ink and the first purged ink container [paragraph 004; not shown but mentioned; note it’s misspelled as “value”]; and
the controller is further configured to:
operate the second valve to provide black colored ink from the supply of black ink to the first purged ink container to alter the process black ink in the first purged ink container [paragraph 0040.]
Regarding claim 8,
In the obvious combination, Zoltner further discloses at least one printhead in the plurality of printheads further comprising:
first array of inkjets [144 in fig. 1] that eject a first color of ink [black; paragraphs 0027-0030]; and
a second array of inkjets [146/148/150 in fig. 1] that eject a second color of ink [magenta/cyan/yellow] that is different than the first color of ink [paragraphs 0027-0030.]
Regarding claim 9,
In the obvious combination, Zoltner further discloses wherein the first array of inkjets is fluidly connected to the first purged ink container [as seen in fig. 1.]
Regarding claim 10,
In the obvious combination, Zoltner further discloses the controller being further configured to:
operate the first valve to connect the first array of inkjets to the supply of black ink and the first purged ink container selectively [paragraphs 0026-0030, 0033, and 0037.]
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 7 are 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:
Regarding claim 5,
The primary reason for allowance for this claim is the inclusion of the limitations of claims 1-4, further comprising wherein at least one of the printheads ejects black colored ink received the supply of black ink only and at least one other printhead ejects process black ink received from the first purged ink container only: and
the controller is operatively connected to the at least one printhead that ejects black colored ink only and to the at least one printhead that eject process black ink only, the controller being further configured to:
operate the at least one printhead that ejects black colored ink only and the at least one printhead that ejects process black ink only with reference to image content data and print job parameters.
It is these limitations, in combination as claimed, that have not been taught, found, or suggested by prior art.
Regarding claim 7,
This claim is considered to have allowable subject matter due to its dependency on claim 5.
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANNELLE M LEBRON whose telephone number is (571)272-2729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Douglas X Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
/JANNELLE M LEBRON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853