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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 6/23/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-7 remain pending. Claims 1 and 6-7 have been amended. Claims 8-9 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6-8, filed 6/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 6-7 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Yoneda (US 20090232526).
Applicant argues that Nakamura does not disclose the limitations added to claim 6 in the current amendment. Examiner agrees, some of the newly added limitations are not covered by Nakamura. However, Yoneda discloses an image forming apparatus, comprising a developer cartridge with a developer replenishing system, and an image formation apparatus incorporating the cartridge. The replenishment section is above the toner developer supply unit and a discharge port is present for excess developer in the supply unit, leading to a reservoir.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8-11, filed 6/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-7 under 35 USC 103 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Kato (JP 2007033631) in view of Anno (US 20200096888), and further in view of Yoneda (US 20090232526).
Applicant argues the amended range of barium titanate in claim 1 is no longer covered by Toshiyuki, and that Ryuichi does not teach the inclusion of strontium titanate on the carrier particle when a silicone resin is used. Examiner agrees Toshiyuki only discloses barium titanate up to 10 mass% of the resin. However, while Ryuichi teaches preferred combinations of strontium titanate when PMMA resin is used and barium titanate when silicone resin is used, it does not teach away from the more general teaching of using strontium titanate, and/or barium titanate particles when the toner is a negatively charged toner.
To cover the amended claim range for the amount of barium titanate, and avoid possibly teaching away from the invention, Kato is relied upon to teach the combination of a carrier coated with silicone with barium titanate, and Anno teaching a developer comprising strontium titanate on both the toner and carrier. Yoneda is again relied upon to teach the apparatus, as well as the combination of the developer and a replenishment developer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoneda (US 20090232526).
Regarding claims 6-7, Yoneda discloses a developer cartridge of a premix developer replenishing system, and an image formation apparatus incorporating the cartridge ([0019]). The image formation apparatus comprising developer cartridges containing developer to develop latent images, the original developer cartridges replaceable with a developer supply unit holding the replenishing developer premix ([0042]-[0043], Fig 1 and 3). The developer supply unit is located above the development means (Fig, 1 and 3). The developer unit, #14, contains the two-component developer, a carrier and toner, and is replenished by the developer supply unit, #59, in accordance with toner consumption. The supplied replenishing developer is also a two-component developer ([0050], [0054], Fig. 3). The developer supply unit is controlled to adjust the developer supply to the developing unit, ensuring a proper toner concentration ([0064]). Yoneda further discloses the developer unit comprises a discharge port to discharge extraneous developer in the developer unit into a reservoir ([0058], Fig. 3).
The applicant has recited the image forming apparatus claims as also containing or comprising the developer of pending claim 1. However, since a developer, or toner, is a material that is consumed by the apparatus and is not a permanent fixture of the apparatus, its inclusion in the apparatus claims does not represent a material limitation on the apparatus. Multiple different developers may be used in any xerographic apparatus and therefore the limitations of the developer in the present claims do not represent material limitations on the apparatus because the developer with these limitations could be substituted by another developer and not alter the mechanical functioning of the apparatus. § MPEP 2115. In accordance with MPEP 2114 an apparatus in a claim must be recited structurally and therefore the type of toner to be used possesses no patentability, only the material properties of the apparatus are patentable. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Additionally, a claim containing a recitation in respect to the manner that an apparatus is intended to be used does not differentiate the claim from prior art. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). In further regards to the toner, MPEP 2115 states that, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963).
The toner is a material worked upon and consumed by the image forming apparatus. A material portion of the apparatus must be a permanent fixture of the apparatus that is not permanently changed by the regular operation of the apparatus. The toner, during the course of the imaging process, is changed from a particulate material to a melted and fused material. During fixing, heat and/or pressure is applied to the toner to bind it to the recording material such that the toner cannot be recovered and re-used in the apparatus. Therefore, the toner cannot be claimed as a structural member of the apparatus.
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 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (JP 2007033631) in view of Anno (US 20200096888).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 8-9, Kato discloses a two-component developer comprising a carrier with a core coated with a coating resin. The coating resin contains barium titanate fine powder in an amount of 3-50 % by weight of the coating resin ([0014]-[0015]). Kato further discloses the coating resin can be a known resin, including a silicone resin which may further include carbon black ([0025]). Kato further discloses an Example carrier produce using silicone as the sole resin in the coating, with 20% by weight of barium titanate, and 5 % by weight carbon black ([0043]). However, Kato does not disclose the toner comprises strontium titanate particles on the surface, or strontium titanate particles on the coated carrier particles.
Anno teaches a developer containing a carrier with a core and a silicone resin containing layer, strontium titanate particles having an average particles size of 20-100 nm, and a toner (abstract, [0010]). Anno further teaches the strontium titanate used in the developer reduces the occurrence of density unevenness after being left to stand in high temperature and high humidity environments ([0010], [0024]). Anno further teaches the strontium titanate particles are likely to adhere to the silicone resin on the surface of the carrier as well as on the toner ([0022], [0080]). Anno further teaches the amount of strontium titanate particles other than the free particles and the particles firmly adhered to the toner (aka the strontium titanate adhered to the silicone resin layer of the carrier) is 10-70 mass% of the strontium titanate ([0107]). Anno does not teach a specific content ratio of strontium titanate particles adhered to the carrier per 100 parts by mass of carrier particles. However, a range can be calculated from the examples. Anno teaches Toner (1) is produced by mixing 100 parts of toner particles are mixed with 1 part RX 50 (silica) and 1 part of strontium titanate ([0344]). The developer of Example 1 is then produced by mixing 100 parts of carrier a carrier with 7 parts of the toner, therefore providing the free strontium titanate particles, and strontium titanate particles adhered to the silicone resin of the carrier ([0360]). The total mass% of strontium titanate in the toner is 1/ (100+1+1) = 0.98 mass% of the toner. The toner is 7/(100+7) = 6.54 mass% of the developer. Therefore, the total amount of strontium titanate in the developer is 0.98 mass% of 6.54 mass%, or 0.0654*0.0098 = 0.064 mass% of the developer. The 10-70 mass% of strontium titanate which is not free in the developer or firmly attached to the toner, (aka strontium titanate which is attached to the carrier) would therefore be in the range of 0.0064 to 0.0448 parts per 100 parts of carrier particles. Anno further teaches Toners (2)-(8) comprising 0.5-2.5 parts strontium titanate ([0345]-[0350]), which would inherently result in lower and higher amounts of strontium titanate in the developer, and therefore an even wider range for the amount attached to the carrier. While Anno does disclose an acrylic resin along with the silicone resin, the resins are used to form separate layers. The silicone resin layer is produced from a mix of silicone and γ-aminopropyltriethoxysilane, which when reacted results in 100 mass% silicone resin, the acrylic resin is a separate, partial layer over the silicone ([0301]-[0305]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the developer of Kato included strontium titanate on the toner and the developer, as taught by Anno, to prevent density unevenness in formed images after being left to stand for a long time in a high temperature and high humidity environment.
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (JP 2007033631) in view of Anno (US 20200096888) as applied to claims 1-3 and 8-9 above, and further in view of Yoneda (US 20090232526).
Regarding claims 4-5, modified Kato discloses all limitations as set forth above. However, Kato does not disclose a developer set including the developer and a replenishment developer.
Yoneda teaches a developer cartridge comprising a premix developer replenishing system to supply new developer to a developer unit ([0003]). Yoneda further teaches the developer replenishing system includes an ID chip storing data on the carrier content rate. This allows different developers to be used with different ratios of toner to carrier, and different compositions, while allowing control of the supply rate when replenishing to ensure the toner concentration in the developer unit is in the correct range ([0064], [0099]). Yoneda further teaches strontium titanate as a possible external additive for the toner in the replenishment developer ([0153]). However, no mention of strontium titanate is mentioned in reference to the replenishment developer. Furthermore, unmodified Kato teaches the silicone resin coat layer comprising barium titanate results in a developer with excellent durability and environmental stability ([0020]-[0022]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a replenishment developer with a carrier having only a silicone resin coating layer including barium titanate, without strontium titanate, as disclosed by Kato, for excellent durability and stability.
Regarding claims 6-7, modified Kato discloses all limitations as set forth above. Assuming arguendo the developer is a material limitation of the image forming apparatus, Yoneda further teaches a developer cartridge of a premix developer replenishing system, and an image formation apparatus incorporating the cartridge ([0019]). The image formation apparatus comprising developer cartridges containing developer to develop latent images, the original developer cartridges replaceable with a developer supply unit holding the replenishing developer premix ([0042]-[0043], Fig 1 and 3). The developer supply unit is located above the development means (Fig, 1 and 3). The developer unit, #14, contains the two-component developer, a carrier and toner, and is replenished by the developer supply unit, #59, in accordance with toner consumption. The supplied replenishing developer is also a two-component developer ([0050], [0054], Fig. 3). The developer supply unit is controlled to adjust the developer supply to the developing unit, ensuring a proper toner concentration ([0064]). Yoneda further teaches the developer unit comprises a discharge port to discharge extraneous developer in the developer unit into a reservoir ([0058], Fig. 3).
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 CHARLES COLLINS SULLIVAN IV whose telephone number is (571)272-2208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/C.C.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/AMBER R ORLANDO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights