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 .
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 “spring perch angle” 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.
Preliminary Amendment
Applicant submitted preliminary amendments to the Claims, Abstract, and Specification on 20 September 2024, and examination is based thereon.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim should be one sentence. Currently, the claim appears to be approximately twelve sentences. Additionally, the claim has multiple grammatical and referencing errors. Each claim must begin with a capital letter and end with a period [MPEP 608.01(m)]. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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 claim is generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. The structure of the claim must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device and must be in one sentence form only.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AKAHANE et al. (US 2018/0215179 A1) in view of Okazaki (US 2011/0242245 A1).
AKAHANE et al. teaches an apparatus comprising:
OUTFEED BRACKET LEFT ASSY (Quantity: 1): This is the assembly of the outfeed bracket located on the left side of a device or equipment. It likely serves as a support or attachment point for other components (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraphs 52-59 and Figures 1, 2, & 5, Reference # 16, #61, & #62, shown below).
OUTFEED BRACKET RIGHT ASSY (Quantity: 1): Like item 1, this is an assembly of the outfeed bracket, but it's positioned on the right side of the device or equipment (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraphs 52-59 and Figures 1, 2, & 5, Reference # 16, #61, & #62, shown below).
ROLLER (Quantity: 2): These are rollers used for various purposes, possibly for facilitating the movement or transport of materials within the equipment (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraph 53 and Figure 1, Reference #23, #23a, #22, & #21, shown below).
FLOATING BAR (Quantity: 1): This is a floating bar component, which may have a specific function within the equipment, such as maintaining alignment or providing support (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraph 58 – Page 5, Paragraph 60 and Figures 1 & 2, Reference #55, shown below).
FEED ROLLER (Quantity: 2): These are specialized feed rollers, likely used for feeding or advancing material through the equipment (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraph 53 and Figure 1, Reference #23, #23a, #22, & #21, shown below).
STEPPER MOTOR MOUNT PLATE (Quantity: 2): These plates are designed to hold and secure stepper motors, which are commonly used for precise control of movement within equipment (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraph 53; Page 7, Paragraphs 75-77; and Figure 1, Reference #23M & #22M, shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
568
438
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
354
420
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
180
198
media_image3.png
Greyscale
AKAHANE et al. does not specifically teach a spring perch angle or plates to support or hold springs. However, Okazaki teaches an apparatus comprising: an outfeed bracket left and right assembly (Okazaki – Page 4, Paragraphs 40-46 and Figures 1 & 2, Reference #11, shown below) as well as multiple rollers, a floating bar, and feed rollers (Okazaki – Page 3, Paragraphs 28-35; Page 4, Paragraphs 40-46; and Figure 1, Reference #5, #6, #7, # 22, #24, #21, #20, shown below) and specifically teaches multiple springs and a
SPRING PERCH ANGLE (Quantity: 2): These components are likely designed to
support or hold springs in a specific configuration, potentially to provide tension or
cushioning (Okazaki – Page 1, Paragraphs 10-13; Page 4, Paragraphs 40-41; and Figures 1 & 3, Reference #40 & #11, shown below) and
h. SPRING TENSION PLATE (Quantity: 2): These plates are likely related to spring
mechanisms, possibly for adjusting or controlling tension within the equipment (Okazaki – Page 1, Paragraphs 10-13; Page 4, Paragraphs 40-41; and Figures 1 & 3, Reference #40 & #11, shown below).
PNG
media_image4.png
346
444
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
364
436
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
374
446
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to specify the biasing means of AKAHANE et al. which mentions the use of the elastic force of springs (AKAHANE et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 3 and Page 19, Paragraph 192) to include the spring and angles and plates of Okazaki in an effort to provide a structure which maintains the correct recording medium position using a transport apparatus for transporting the medium under the correct tension (Okazaki – Page 1, Paragraphs 5, 9, & 10).
The combination of AKAHANE et al. and Okazaki continues to teach:
i. BOLT LOCK PLATE (Quantity: 2): These plates may serve as mounting or locking points for bolts, ensuring they are securely fastened within the equipment. Attached to Automated DTF (Direct to Film) and DTP (Direct to Print) apparatus (Direct-to-Printing) technology, unveiling its profound potential in the realm of printing and imaging. Commencing with the foundational aspects of direct-to-film printing, it elucidates the core principles and merits of this technology, including its exceptional precision, cost-effectiveness, and waste reduction. The described embodiments of the present disclosure are intended to be illustrative rather than restrictive and are not intended to represent every embodiment of the present disclosure (AKAHANE et al. – Page 4, Paragraphs 52-59 & Figure 1, Reference #3 & #16, shown above and Okazaki – Page 4, Paragraphs 40-46 and Figures 1, 2, & 3, shown above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Maeda et al. (US 5,057,861 A) teaches an apparatus with outfeed brackets, rollers, floating [i.e. dancing] bars, feed rollers, stepper motor mounts and spring mounts. Wilson (US 5,911,382 A) teaches an apparatus for attachment to a direct to print apparatus, having brackets, rollers, and floating bars. Watkins (US 6,766,844 B1) teaches an apparatus for controlling media in a printer which has brackets, rollers, floating bars, and springs. Midorikawa (US 2008/0128545 A1) teaches an apparatus for use with a direct to print apparatus which includes brackets, rollers, and tension bars. Fukui (US 7,397,487 B2) teaches an apparatus for controlling medium through a direct to print apparatus having brackets, rollers, and dancer/floating bars. KOJIMA (US 2012/0042799 A1) teaches an apparatus for transporting medium through a direct to print apparatus having rollers and a floating/dancer bar. Obata et al. (US 2015/0077494 A1) teaches an apparatus for transporting medium through an image forming device having springs which press rollers and the medium. Amari (US 2019/0315588 A1) teaches an apparatus for controlling medium through a direct to print apparatus having brackets, rollers, and dancer/floating bars. MATSUBA (US 2023/011746 A1) teaches an apparatus for controlling medium through a direct to print apparatus having brackets, rollers, dancer/floating bars and biasing mechanisms or springs.
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular Figures & Reference Numbers, Columns, Paragraphs and Line Numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JOHN P ZIMMERMANN whose telephone number is (571)270-3049. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1730 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 (571) 272-2149. 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.
/John P Zimmermann/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853