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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8 under “Claim Objections”, filed 09/17/2025, with respect to claim 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 6 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see the first three paragraphs on page 11, filed 09/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1, 6, and 15, Applicant argues that Tetsuya, Ryota, Bishop, and/or Satoshi fails to teach the limitations amended to the claims, either separately or in any combination. The applicant further argues against Ryota failing to teach any relationship between a distance of the gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” with a rotational angle of any other component in Ryota’s device. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In paragraphs [0052]-[0053], Ryota does disclose a rotating “cam member 24” that, when rotated by the “motor 22” controlled by the ”control unit 162”, that has a direct relationship with the gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14”
Applicant's arguments, see paragraph 1 under “New Claims 21 and 22” on page 12, filed 09/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 21 and 22, applicant argues the newly-added claims each ultimately depend from claim 1 and are non-obvious due to the argument made to claim 1. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees as all of the applicants’ arguments for claim 1 have been found non persuasive. Furthermore, Tetsuya discloses the second rotation axis moves in a direction transverse to a direction of the second rotation axis along the second roller, and wherein the fixing operation comprises the second rotation axis to move towards the first rotation axis in response to rotation of the first gear about the third axis (Figure 3 displays how the “pressure roller 37” is pressed towards the “fixing roller 36”, in a different direction than the rotational direction the “pressure roller 37” rolls, based on the rotation of the “cam member 54” on a third rotational axis, where the “first gear” taught by Bishop will also be applied, described in paragraph [0024].). Tetsuya further discloses wherein rotation of the arm in conjunction with rotation of the first gear with the cam around the third rotation axis causes the movement of the second rotation axis (Figure 3 displays how the “press contact lever 51” pivots to press the “pressure roller 37” toward the “fixing roller 36” based on the rotation of the “cam member 54” on a third rotational axis, where the “first gear” taught by Bishop will also be applied, described in paragraph [0024].).
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 11-15, 17, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsuya (JP 2010002587 A) in view of Ryota (EP 3686690 A1) and Bishop et al. (US 11169000 B2)
Regarding claim 1, Tetsuya teaches A fixing device (Figure 3 and paragraph [0011] describes a fixing device), comprising:
a first roller rotatable around a first rotation axis (Described in the specification of the present invention as the heating roller and can be found in Tetsuya’s invention described as a “fixing roller 36 (heating roller)” in paragraphs [0002], [0019], and [0021] and displayed in Figure 3.);
a second roller rotatable around a second rotation axis (Described in the specification of the present invention as the pressure roller and can be found in Tetsuya’s invention described as a “pressure roller 37” in paragraphs [0002], [0019], and [0021] and displayed in Figure 3.),
of the second roller configured to contact the first roller so as to form a nip (Figure 3 and paragraph [0021] describes how a “nip portion” when the “fixing roller 36 (heating roller)” and “pressure roller 37” are pressed together.);
Tetsuya fails to teach that the second roller is configured to separate from the first roller.
However, Ryota teaches moving the second roller away from the first roller (Figure 7 displays the “pressure roller 11” moving away from the “film unit 10” causing the “nip 300” to lengthen described in paragraph [0047].).
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered to be analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply the ability for the second roller in the fixing device to be able to separate from the first and cause the nip to expand as taught in Ryota for the purpose of removing a paper when a sheet jam occurs and the prevention of deforming the plastic of the “fixing belt 14” when the “fixing belt stops (Ryota, paragraph [0042]).
Tetsuya also fails to teach a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to a first distance which is continuously changing, the first distance extends between the first rotation axis and the second rotation axis.
However, Ryota teaches a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to a first distance which is continuously changing (Paragraph [0064] describes a “acquisition unit 161” that measures the torque value of the “pressure roller 11”. Paragraphs [0078]-[0083] proceeds to give a detailed description on how the “acquisition unit 161” determines if the “fixing device 132” is working, acquires the torque value of the “pressure roller 11”, and sends this information to the “control unit 162”. The “control unit 162” then determines whether a gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14”. Given that the torque of an object can be affected by the friction of other objects, the “acquisition unit 161” would be able to tell the distance value between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” and send the information to the “control unit 162”.) the first distance extends between the first rotation axis and the second rotation axis (Figures 4,5,6, and 7 display the distance between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” as “CL” and how the distance of “CL” is able to change.).
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to the distance between the first rotation axis and second rotation axis that is capable of changing as taught in Ryota for the purpose of determining if the fixing device is working appropriately (Ryota, paragraphs [0078]-[0079].)
Tetsuya fails to teach and a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis.
However, Bishop teaches a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis (Bishop involves a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). The combination of the “cam member 54”, taught by Tetsuya in Figure 3, that rotates on a third axis from the two rollers from Tetsuya and the “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” would allow someone of ordinary skill in the art to effectively combine both figures to have the “first gear 32” rotate with the “cam member 54” on the same axis.),
Tetsuya and Bishop are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving rotational components and rotational detection. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis taught by Bishop.
This would have been done so that the gear may help rotate the third rotational shaft similar to a driven gear (Tetsuya, paragraph [0021]).
Tetsuya fails to teach wherein, during fixing operation by the fixing device, an angle of rotation of the first gear around the third rotation axis is directly proportional to a distance of movement of the second rotation axis.
However, Ryota teaches wherein, during fixing operation by the fixing device, an angle of rotation of the first gear around the third rotation axis is directly proportional to a distance of movement of the second rotation axis (Paragraphs [0052]-[0055] describe how the “cam member 24”, which is on the third axis similar to Tetsuya’s “cam member 54” and where the “first gear” of Bishop is combined, has a direct relationship of its rotation to the distance between the two rollers within the fixing device. It is known that any movement of a cam requires rotation, and rotation necessarily involves angles, which means the gap distance changes as the cam’s rotational angle does. Furthermore, Ryota describes three example contact points at different angle positions of the “cam member 24” that cause the gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 10” to be at three different distances.)
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply, during fixing operation by the fixing device, an angle of rotation of the first gear around the third rotation axis is directly proportional to a distance of movement of the second rotation axis as taught in Ryota.
This would have been done to adjust the gap of the two rollers (Ryota, paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the fixing device according to claim 1, Tetsuya further discloses the fixing device further comprising: a cam rotatable around the third rotation axis (Figure 3 and paragraph [0025] describes a “cam member 54”); and an arm rotatable in conjunction with a rotation of the cam and rotatably supporting the second roller (Figure 3 and paragraph [0024] describes the arm “fixing pressure variable mechanism 50” is PIVOTALLY supported by a “pivot shaft 51b”.).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the fixing device according to claim 2.
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach wherein the sensor comprises: a magnet rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis, and a tunnel magneto resistance (TMR) element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with rotation of the magnet.
However, the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop teaches wherein the sensor (Tetsuya, involves a “light shielding plate 60” that detects the rotational position of the cam described in paragraph [0026]) includes a magnet (Bishop, involves a “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). If combined with the concept of the sensor on the rotatable cam mentioned in Tetsuya, it is obvious that someone of obvious skill in the art could combine the sensor with the magnet to be on top of a rotatable object such as the cam in Tetsuya.) rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis, and a tunnel magneto resistance (TMR) element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with rotation of the magnet (Bishop, paragraph (16) describes an “anisotropic magneto-resistive (AMR) sensor” which has been labeled as a possible example to be used within several other known rotation detection devices alongside a TMR and a GMR.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving rotational components and rotational detection. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply a magnet to the sensor to rotate together with the cam around the third axis and a tunnel magneto resistance (TMR) element that changes as the magnet rotates as taught in the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop for the purpose of measuring the rotation of the cam on the third axis (Bishop, column 1, lines 6-7) and prevent inaccurate measurements (Bishop, column 1, lines 22 – 30 describe how measurements systems commonly use potentiometers that are prone to mechanical failure and very expensive).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the fixing device according to claim 2.
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach the first gear being rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis; and a second gear rotatable around a fourth rotation axis in conjunction with the first gear and having fewer teeth than the first gear, wherein the sensor comprises: a magnet rotatable together with the second gear around the fourth rotation axis, and a TMR element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with the rotation of the magnet.
However, the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop teaches the first gear being rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis (Tetsuya, Figure 3 and paragraph [0025] describes a “cam member 54”. While Bishop involves a “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). The combination of the “cam member 54” that rotates on a third axis from the two rollers from Tetsuya and the “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” would allow someone of ordinary skill in the art to effectively combine both figures to have the “first gear 32” rotate with the “cam member 54” on the same axis.); and a second gear rotatable around a fourth rotation axis in conjunction with the first gear (Bishop, Figure 3 displays several gears with magnets in conjunction with each other. If the additional gears in Bishop were combined with the teaching of Tetsuya for the fixing device, someone of ordinary skill in the art would be able to modify the fixing device to have a second gear next the first gear that is on top of the “cam member 54” on a fourth rotational axis.) and having fewer teeth than the first gear (Bishop, Figure 3 displays the gears in different sizes and with different amounts of teeth. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second gear to have fewer teeth than the first), wherein the sensor comprises: a magnet rotatable together with the second gear around the fourth rotation axis (Bishop, Figure 3 displays several gears in conjunction with each other. Each gear is equipped with a magnet described in paragraph (15). Therefore, it would be obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second gear to also have a magnet to be on the second gear of the fixing device around the fourth axis.), and a TMR element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with the rotation of the magnet (Bishop, paragraph (16) describes an “anisotropic magneto-resistive (AMR) sensor” which has been labeled as a possible example to be used within several other known rotation detection devices alongside a TMR and a GMR.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply a first gear rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis; and a second gear rotatable around a fourth rotation axis in conjunction with the first gear and having fewer teeth than the first gear, wherein the sensor includes a magnet rotatable together with the second gear around the fourth rotation axis, and a TMR element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with the rotation of the magnet as taught in the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop for the purpose of measuring the rotation of the cam on the third axis (Bishop, column 1, lines 6-7) and prevent inaccurate measurements (Bishop, column 1, lines 22 – 30 describe how measurements systems commonly use potentiometers that are prone to mechanical failure and very expensive).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the fixing device according to claim 4,
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach wherein the second gear is rotatable in an angular range of less than 360°.
However, the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop teaches wherein the second gear is rotatable in an angular range of less than 360° (Paragraph (25) describes how each gear has a different gear ration and angular position due to the different number of teeth. Therefore, it would stand to reason that the second gear could have an angular range less than 360°, fulfilling the limitation requirements mentioned in this claim of the claimed invention.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply wherein the second gear is rotatable in an angular range of less than 360° as taught in the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop for the purpose of preventing inaccurate measurements (Bishop, column 1, lines 22 – 30 describe how measurements systems commonly use potentiometers that are prone to mechanical failure and very expensive).
Regarding claim 6, Tetsuya teaches an image forming device (Figure 2 displays an “image forming apparatus” and is described in paragraph [0018]), comprising:
an image forming component that forms an image (Paragraph [0001] describes how the “image forming apparatus” performs the function acknowledges in this limitation.);
a fixing device for fixing an image onto a sheet (Figure 3 and paragraph [0011] describes a fixing device),
the fixing device (Paragraph [0011] describes a fixing device), comprising:
a first roller rotatable around a first rotation axis (Described in the specification of the present invention as the heating roller and can be found in Tetsuya’s invention described as a “fixing roller 36 (heating roller)” in paragraphs [0002], [0019], and [0021] and displayed in Figure 3.),
a second roller rotatable around a second rotation axis (Described in the specification of the present invention as the pressure roller and can be found in Tetsuya’s invention described as a “pressure roller 37” in paragraphs [0002], [0019], and [0021] and displayed in Figure 3.),
the second roller configured to contact the first roller so as to form a nip (Figure 3 and paragraph [0021] describes how a “nip portion” when the “fixing roller 36 (heating roller)” and “pressure roller 37” are pressed together.),
and a controller that controls an operation of the fixing device (Paragraph [0030] describes a “control unit” within the “image forming apparatus 10”.).
wherein the second rotation axis and the second roller move along a direction transverse to a direction of extension of the second rotation axis towards the first rotation axis (Figure 3 displays how the “pressure roller 37” is pressed towards the “fixing roller 36”, in a different direction than the rotational direction the “pressure roller 37” rolls, based on the rotation of the “cam member 54” on a third rotational axis, where the “first gear” taught by Bishop will also be applied, described in paragraph [0024].)
Tetsuya fails to teach that the second roller is configured to separate from the first roller.
However, Ryota teaches a second roller configured to separate from the first roller (Figure 7 displays the “pressure roller 11” moving away from the “film unit 10” causing the “nip 300” to lengthen described in paragraph [0047].).
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply the ability for the second roller in the fixing device to be able to separate from the first and cause the nip to expand as taught in Ryota for the purpose of removing a paper when a sheet jam occurs and the prevention of deforming the plastic of the “fixing belt 14” when the “fixing belt stops (Ryota, paragraph [0042]).
Tetsuya also fails to teach a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to a first distance which is continuously changing, the first distance extends between the first rotation axis and the second rotation axis.
However, Ryota teaches a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to a first distance which is continuously changing (Paragraph [0064] describes a “acquisition unit 161” that measures the torque value of the “pressure roller 11”. Paragraphs [0078]-[0083] proceeds to give a detailed description on how the “acquisition unit 161” determines if the “fixing device 132” is working, acquires the torque value of the “pressure roller 11”, and sends this information to the “control unit 162”. The “control unit 162” then determines whether a gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14”. Given that the torque of an object can be affected by the friction of other objects, the “acquisition unit 161” would be able to tell the distance value between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” and send the information to the “control unit 162”.), the first distance extends between the first rotation axis and the second rotation axis (Figures 4,5,6, and 7 display the distance between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” as “CL” and how the distance of “CL” is able to change.).
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to the distance between the first rotation axis and second rotation axis that is capable of changing as taught in Ryota for the purpose of determining if the fixing device is working appropriately (Ryota, paragraphs [0078]-[0079].)
Tetsuya fails to teach a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis.
However, Bishop teaches a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis (Bishop involves a “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). The combination of the “cam member 54”,taught by Tetsuya in Figure 3: paragraph [0025], that rotates on a third axis from the two rollers from Tetsuya and the “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” would allow someone of ordinary skill in the art to effectively combine both figures to have the “first gear 32” rotate with the “cam member 54” on the same axis.)
Tetsuya and Bishop are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving rotational components and rotational detection. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis taught by Bishop.
This would have been done so that the gear may help rotate the third rotational shaft similar to a driven gear (Tetsuya, paragraph [0021]).
Tetsuya fails to teach wherein the second rotation axis and the second roller move along a direction transverse to a direction of extension of the second rotation axis towards the first rotation axis, and wherein a distance moved by the second rotation axis to allow for the second roller to move towards the first roller is directly proportional to an angle of rotation of the first gear around the third rotation axis;
However, Ryota teaches wherein a distance moved by the second rotation axis to allow for the second roller to move towards the first roller is directly proportional to an angle of rotation of the first gear around the third rotation axis (Paragraphs [0052]-[0055] describe how the “cam member 24”, which is on the third axis similar to Tetsuya’s “cam member 54” and where the “first gear” of Bishop is combined, has a direct relationship of its rotation to the distance between the two rollers within the fixing device. It is known that any movement of a cam requires rotation, and rotation necessarily involves angles, which means the gap distance changes as the cam’s rotational angle does. Furthermore, Ryota describes three example contact points at different angle positions of the “cam member 24” that cause the gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 10” to be at three different distances.)
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply wherein a distance moved by the second rotation axis to allow for the second roller to move towards the first roller is directly proportional to an angle of rotation of the first gear around the third rotation axis taught by Ryota.
This would have been done to adjust the gap of the two rollers (Ryota, paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 6, Tetsuya further discloses wherein, when the sheet is a first sheet having a thickness equal to or greater than a predetermined value, the controller causes the first distance to be shorter than when the sheet is a second sheet having a thickness less than the predetermined value (Paragraphs [0010] - [0012] describes how the fixing process varies the distance between the heating roller and the pressure roller depending on the type of form of the paper including the width of the paper.).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 6, Tetsuya further discloses wherein the fixing device further comprises a cam rotatable around a third rotation axis (Figure 3 and paragraph [0025] describes a “cam member 54”); and an arm rotatable in conjunction with a rotation of the cam and rotatably supporting the second roller (Figure 3 and paragraph [0024] describes the arm “fixing pressure variable mechanism 50” is PIVOTALLY supported by a “pivot shaft 51b”.).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 11,
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach wherein the sensor comprises: a magnet rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis, and a tunnel magneto resistance (TMR) element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with rotation of the magnet.
However, the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop teaches wherein the sensor (Tetsuya, involves a “light shielding plate 60” that detects the rotational position of the cam described in paragraph [0026]) comprises: a magnet (Bishop, involves a “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). If combined with the concept of the sensor on the rotatable cam mentioned in Tetsuya, it is obvious that someone of obvious skill in the art could combine the sensor with the magnet to be on top of a rotatable object such as the cam in Tetsuya.) rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis, and a tunnel magneto resistance (TMR) element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with rotation of the magnet (Bishop, paragraph (16) describes an “anisotropic magneto-resistive (AMR) sensor” which has been labeled as a possible example to be used within several other known rotation detection devices alongside a TMR and a GMR.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop are considered to be analogous art because they are in the same field involving a rotational components and rotational detection. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply a magnet to the sensor to rotate together with the cam around the third axis and a tunnel magneto resistance (TMR) element that changes as the magnet rotates as taught in the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop for the purpose of measuring the rotation of the cam on the third axis (Bishop, column 1, lines 6-7) and prevent inaccurate measurements (Bishop, column 1, lines 22 – 30 describe how measurements systems commonly use potentiometers that are prone to mechanical failure and very expensive).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 11, further comprising:
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach the first gear being rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis; and a second gear rotatable around a fourth rotation axis in conjunction with the first gear and having fewer teeth than the first gear, wherein the sensor comprises: a magnet rotatable together with the second gear around the fourth rotation axis, and a TMR element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with the rotation of the magnet.
However, the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop teaches the first gear being rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis (Tetsuya, Figure 3 and paragraph [0025] describes a “cam member 54”. While Bishop, involves a “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). The combination of the “cam member 54” that rotates on a third axis from the two rollers from Tetsuya and the “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” would allow someone of ordinary skill in the art to effectively combine both figures to have the “first gear 32” rotate with the “cam member 54” on the same axis.); and a second gear rotatable around a fourth rotation axis in conjunction with the first gear (Bishop, Figure 3 displays several gears with magnets in conjunction with each other. If the additional gears in Bishop were combined with the teaching of Tetsuya for the fixing device, someone of ordinary skill in the art would be able to modify the fixing device to have a second gear next the first gear that is on top of the “cam member 54” on a fourth rotational axis.) and having fewer teeth than the first gear (Bishop, Figure 3 displays the gears in different sizes and with different amounts of teeth. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second gear to have fewer teeth than the first), wherein the sensor comprises: a magnet rotatable together with the second gear around the fourth rotation axis (Bishop, Figure 3 displays several gears in conjunction with each other. Each gear is equipped with a magnet described in paragraph (15). Therefore, it would be obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second gear to also have a magnet to be on the second gear of the fixing device around the fourth axis.), and a TMR element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with the rotation of the magnet (Bishop, paragraph (16) describes an “anisotropic magneto-resistive (AMR) sensor” which has been labeled as a possible example to be used within several other known rotation detection devices alongside a TMR and a GMR.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop are considered to be analogous to the invention because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply a first gear rotatable together with the cam around the third rotation axis; and a second gear rotatable around a fourth rotation axis in conjunction with the first gear and having fewer teeth than the first gear, wherein the sensor includes a magnet rotatable together with the second gear around the fourth rotation axis, and a TMR element of which a tunnel magnetic resistance changes with the rotation of the magnet as taught in the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop for the purpose of measuring the rotation of the cam on the third axis (Bishop, column 1, lines 6-7) and prevent inaccurate measurements (Bishop, column 1, lines 22 – 30 describe how measurements systems commonly use potentiometers that are prone to mechanical failure and very expensive).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 13.
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach wherein the second gear is rotatable in an angular range of less than 360°.
However, the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop teaches wherein the second gear is rotatable in an angular range of less than 360° (Paragraph (25) describes how each gear has a different gear ration and angular position due to the different number of teeth. Therefore, it would stand to reason that the second gear could have an angular range less than 360°, fulfilling the limitation requirements mentioned in this claim of the claimed invention.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop are considered to be analogous to the invention because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply wherein the second gear is rotatable in an angular range of less than 360° as taught in the combination of Tetsuya and Bishop for the purpose of preventing inaccurate measurements (Bishop, column 1, lines 22 – 30 describe how measurements systems commonly use potentiometers that are prone to mechanical failure and very expensive).
Regarding claim 15, Tetsuya teaches a method for an image forming device (Figure 2 displays an “image forming apparatus” and is described in paragraph [0018]), comprising:
forming an image with an image forming component (Paragraph [0001] describes how the “image forming apparatus” performs the function acknowledges in this limitation.);
fixing the image onto a sheet with a fixing device (Figure 3 and paragraph [0011] describes a fixing device), the fixing comprising:
rotating a first roller around a first rotation axis (Described in the specification of the present invention as the heating roller and can be found in Tetsuya’s invention described as a “fixing roller 36 (heating roller)” in paragraphs [0002], [0019], and [0021] and displayed in Figure 3.);
rotating a second roller around a second rotation axis (Described in the specification of the present invention as the pressure roller and can be found in Tetsuya’s invention described as a “pressure roller 37” in paragraphs [0002], [0019], and [0021] and displayed in Figure 3.),
contacting the second roller to the first roller so as to form a nip (Figure 3 and paragraph [0021] describes how a “nip portion” when the “fixing roller 36 (heating roller)” and “pressure roller 37” are pressed together.),
and controlling an operation of the fixing device (Paragraph [0030] describes a “control unit” within the “image forming apparatus 10”.).
Tetsuya fails to teach separating the second roller from the first roller.
However, Ryota teaches separating the second roller from the first roller (Figure 7 displays the “pressure roller 11” moving away from the “film unit 10” causing the “nip 300” to lengthen described in paragraph [0042].).
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered to analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply the ability for the second roller in the fixing device to be able to separate from the first and cause the nip to expand as taught in Ryota for the purpose of removing a paper when a sheet jam occurs and the prevention of deforming the plastic of the “fixing belt 14” when the “fixing belt stops (Ryota, paragraph [0042]).
Tetsuya also fails to teach outputting a signal corresponding to a first distance which is continuously changing, the first distance extends between the first rotation axis and the second rotation axis.
However, Ryota teaches outputting a signal corresponding to a first distance which is continuously changing (Paragraph [0064] describes a “acquisition unit 161” that measures the torque value of the “pressure roller 11”. Paragraphs [0078]-[0083] proceeds to give a detailed description on how the “acquisition unit 161” determines if the “fixing device 132” is working, acquires the torque value of the “pressure roller 11”, and sends this information to the “control unit 162”. The “control unit 162” then determines whether a gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14”. Given that the torque of an object can be affected by the friction of other objects, the “acquisition unit 161” would be able to tell the distance value between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” and send the information to the “control unit 162”.), the first distance extends between the first rotation axis and the second rotation axis (Figures 4,5,6, and 7 display the distance between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 14” as “CL” and how the distance of “CL” is able to change.).
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered to analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply a sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to the distance between the first rotation axis and second rotation axis that is capable of changing as taught in Ryota for the purpose of determining if the fixing device is working appropriately (Ryota, paragraphs [0078]-[0079].)
Tetsuya fails to teach and rotating a first gear about a third rotation axis that extends along the second rotation axis.
However, Bishop teaches a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis (Bishop involves a “first gear 32” described in paragraph (15). The combination of the “cam member 54”,taught by Tetsuya in Figure 3: paragraph [0025], that rotates on a third axis from the two rollers from Tetsuya and the “first magnet 42” positioned on a “first gear 32” would allow someone of ordinary skill in the art to effectively combine both figures to have the “first gear 32” rotate with the “cam member 54” on the same axis.)
Tetsuya and Bishop are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving rotational components and rotational detection. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply a first gear rotatable around a third rotation axis taught by Bishop.
This would have been done so that the gear may help rotate the third rotational shaft similar to a driven gear (Tetsuya, paragraph [0021]).
Tetsuya fails to teach wherein a spacing distance between the first roller and the second roller, during movement of the second roller causing the contacting, changes linearly with rotation of the first gear about the third rotation axis.
However, Ryota teaches wherein a spacing distance between the first roller and the second roller, during movement of the second roller causing the contacting, changes linearly with rotation of the first gear about the third rotation axis. (Paragraphs [0052]-[0055] describe how the “cam member 24”, which is on the third axis similar to Tetsuya’s “cam member 54” and where the “first gear” of Bishop is combined, has a direct relationship of its rotation to the distance between the two rollers within the fixing device. It is known that any movement of a cam requires rotation, and rotation necessarily involves angles, which means the gap distance changes as the cam’s rotational angle does. Furthermore, Ryota describes three example contact points at different angle positions of the “cam member 24” that cause the gap between the “pressure roller 11” and the “fixing belt 10” to be at three different distances.)
Tetsuya and Ryota are considered to analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya to also apply a spacing distance between the first roller and the second roller, during movement of the second roller causing the contacting, changes linearly with rotation of the first gear about the third rotation axis as taught in Ryota.
This would have been done to adjust the gap of the two rollers (Ryota, paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the method according to claim 15, Tetsuya further discloses wherein, when the sheet is a first sheet having a thickness equal to or greater than a predetermined value, the method further comprises causing the first distance to be shorter than when the sheet is a second sheet having a thickness less than the predetermined value (Paragraphs [0010] - [0012] describe how the fixing process varies the distance between the heating roller and the pressure roller depending on the type of form of the paper including the width of the paper.).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the method according to claim 15, Tetsuya further discloses the method for an image forming device further comprising: rotating a cam around the third rotation axis (Paragraph [0025] describes a “cam member 54”); and rotating an arm in conjunction with a rotation of the cam and rotatably supporting the second roller (Paragraph [0024] describes the arm “fixing pressure variable mechanism 50” is PIVOTALLY supported by a “pivot shaft 51b”).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the fixing device according to claim 1, modified Tetsuya further disclose wherein, the second rotation axis moves in a direction transverse to a direction of the second rotation axis along the second roller, and wherein the fixing operation comprises the second rotation axis to move towards the first rotation axis in response to rotation of the first gear about the third axis (Figure 3 displays how the “pressure roller 37” is pressed towards the “fixing roller 36”, in a different direction than the rotational direction the “pressure roller 37” rolls, based on the rotation of the “cam member 54” on a third rotational axis, where the “first gear” taught by Bishop will also be applied, described in paragraph [0024].).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the fixing device according to claim 2, modified Tetsuya further discloses wherein rotation of the arm in conjunction with rotation of the first gear with the cam around the third rotation axis causes the movement of the second rotation axis (Figure 3 displays how the “press contact lever 51” presses the “pressure roller 37” toward the “fixing roller 36” based on the rotation of the “cam member 54” on a third rotational axis, where the “first gear” taught by Bishop will also be applied, described in paragraph [0024].).
Claim(s) 7, 10, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Tetsuya (JP 2010002587 A), Ryota (EP 3686690 A1), and Bishop (US 11169000 B2) as applied to claim 6 and 15 above, and further in view of Satoshi et al. (JP 2019049675 A)
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 6, Tetsuya further discloses wherein the controller changes the first distance in accordance with at least one of a thickness of the sheet (Paragraphs [0003] and [0004] describe how the fixing process varies the distance between the heating roller and the pressure roller depending on the type of form of the paper including the width of the paper. Paragraph [0030] further discloses how each control element, including the “fixing pressure variable mechanism 50”, is driven and controlled by a control signal from the “control unit”.)
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach wherein the controller changes the first distance in accordance with a temperature of the nip.
However, Satoshi teaches wherein the controller changes the first distance in accordance with a temperature of the nip (Paragraphs [0033] and [0034] describe how the “pressure of the nip” or the distance between the two rollers depends on the temperature of the surface on the “fixing roller 31” that is detected by the “temperature detection unit 36” that transmits the detection results to the “control unit 80.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Satoshi are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply the distance of the nip to be affected by the temperature of the nip as taught in Satoshi for the purpose of suppressing fixing failure (Satoshi, last line of paragraph [0009] and line 4 of paragraph [0041].).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the image forming device according to claim 6.
The combination of Tetsuya and Ryota fail to teach wherein, when the temperature of the nip is less than a predetermined temperature, the controller causes the first distance to be shorter than when the temperature of the nip is equal to or higher than the predetermined temperature.
However, Satoshi teaches wherein, when the temperature of the nip is less than a predetermined temperature, the controller causes the first distance to be shorter than when the temperature of the nip is equal to or higher than the predetermined temperature (Paragraphs [0033] and [0034] describe how the “pressure of the nip” or the distance between the two rollers depends on the temperature of the surface on the “fixing roller 31” that is detected by the “temperature detection unit 36” that transmits the detection results to the “control unit 80. Paragraph [0034] further explains how the pressure of the nip (distance between the two rollers) is increased when the temperature is set at a lower value and how the pressure of the nip is decreased, putting more distance between the two rollers, when the temperature level is high.).
Tetsuya, Ryota, and Satoshi are considered analogous art because they are in the same field involving a fixing device and an image forming apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixing device as taught in Tetsuya and Ryota to also apply when the temperature of the nip is less than a predetermined temperature, the controller causes the first distance to be shorter than when the temperature of the nip is equal to or higher than the predetermined temperature as taught in Satoshi for the purpose of suppressing fixing failure (Satoshi, last line of paragraph [0009] and line 4 of paragraph [0041].).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Tetsuya, Ryota, and Bishop teaches the method according to claim 15, Tetsuya further discloses the method for an image forming device further comprising: changing the first distance in accordance with at least one of a thickness of the