CTFR 18/477,408 CTFR 84217 DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 6 and 9-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamai (US Pub No. 2018/0178563 A1) in view of Arakane (US Patent No. 8,585,051 B2) . Regarding Claim 1 , Tamai discloses a discharge tray (21) on which a sheet discharged is to be stacked, the discharge tray including a first support portion (40, Fig. 8), a second support portion (33), and a protruding portion (i.e. see annotated Fig. 8 below), wherein the first support portion includes a first portion (i.e. the left 40) and a second portion (i.e. the right 40) separately disposed in a width direction (Y) orthogonal to the discharge direction (X), and is configured to support a first sheet that is wider than an interval between the first portion and the second portion in the width direction, wherein the second support portion is disposed between the first portion and the second portion in the width direction and at a position lower than the first support portion in a vertical direction, and is configured to support a second sheet that is narrower than the interval between the first portion and the second portion in the width direction (see Fig. 8), wherein the protruding portion protrudes upward from the second support portion, and is configured to contact a lower surface of the second sheet supported by the second support portion to separate upward a leading end of the second sheet in the discharge direction from the second support portion (i.e. the protruding portion is on the upper surface of 33 so contacts/supports the lower surface of the narrower sheets), wherein the protruding portion includes a top portion (see annotated Fig. 8 below) and an inclined surface (see annotated Fig. 8 below) inclined from the second support portion toward the top portion, the inclined surface inclining to be higher in the vertical direction toward a downstream side in the discharge direction and wherein, over a region where the protruding portion extends in the discharge direction and as viewed in the width direction, the protruding portion overlaps with the first support portion and is lower than the first support portion in the vertical direction (i.e. as in Fig. 8, the protruding portions are between 40 in the widthwise direction/overlap and at the same level as 31a, which is lower than 40). Tamai does not explicitly disclose a discharge roller. Arakane discloses a discharge roller (49) configured to discharge a sheet in a discharge direction, for the purpose of discharging sheets onto discharge tray 21. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai by including the discharge roller as disclosed by Arakane, for the purpose of discharging sheets onto discharge tray 21. Regarding Claim 6 , Tamai discloses the discharge tray includes a plurality of the protruding portions (i.e. two such portions, see annotated Fig. 8 below) disposed in the width direction on the second support portion. Regarding Claim 9 , Tamai discloses wherein the protruding portion is a first protruding portion (see annotated Fig. 8 below), and wherein the discharge tray further includes a second protruding portion (see annotated Fig. 8 below, including the peak of the rib) that is disposed downstream of the first protruding portion on the second support portion and protrudes upward from the second support portion. Regarding Claim 10 , Tamai discloses wherein a top portion of the second protruding portion is located at a position higher than a top portion of the first protruding portion (i.e. since the second protruding portion includes the peak, it is higher than the top portion of the first protruding portion). Regarding Claim 11 , Tamai does not disclose the length claimed. However, since the specification is silent as to criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai by including a length of the second support portion in the width direction to be between 55mm and 105mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art and for the purpose of accommodating a sheet size as desired. It is noted that while the size is disclosed in [0045], no specific criticality is provided. Regarding Claim 12 , Tamai discloses a feeding port (at 60, [0052]) wherein discharge tray 21 is disposed below it in the vertical direction, but does not explicitly disclose a feeding tray or roller. Arakane discloses a feeding tray (31) on which the sheet is to be stacked; and a feed roller (54) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray, for the purpose of feeding sheets of various sizes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai by including the feeding tray and feed roller, as disclosed by Arakane, for the purpose of feeding sheets of various sizes. Regarding Claims 13 and 14 , Tamai discloses an image forming unit (22, 23) configured to form an image on a recording medium based on image information for the sheet read by the reader 50, a feeding port (at 60, [0052]) wherein discharge tray 21 is disposed below it in the vertical direction, but does not explicitly disclose a feeding tray or roller. Arakane discloses a feeding tray (31) on which the sheet is to be stacked; and a feed roller (54) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray, for the purpose of feeding sheets of various sizes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai by including the feeding tray and feed roller, as disclosed by Arakane, for the purpose of feeding sheets of various sizes. Tamai and Arakane do not disclose the claimed discharge tray to be used in the application of a reader. Tamai discloses a reader (50) configured to read an image on the fed sheet, for the purpose of scanning documents. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai and Arakane by applying the discharge tray and associated structure to the reader of Tamai since it also has a discharge tray 15 and for the purpose of scanning documents. Regarding Claim 15 , Tamai discloses a discharge tray (21) on which a sheet discharged is to be stacked, the discharge tray including a first support portion (40, Fig. 8), a second support portion (33), and a protruding portion (i.e. see annotated Fig. 8 below), wherein the first support portion includes a first portion (i.e. the left 40) and a second portion (i.e. the right 40) separately disposed in a width direction (Y) orthogonal to the discharge direction (X), and is configured to support a first sheet that is wider than an interval between the first portion and the second portion in the width direction, wherein the second support portion is disposed between the first portion and the second portion in the width direction and at a position lower than the first support portion in a vertical direction, and is configured to support a second sheet that is narrower than the interval between the first portion and the second portion in the width direction (see Fig. 8), wherein the protruding portion protrudes upward from the second support portion, and is configured to contact a lower surface of the second sheet supported by the second support portion to separate upward a leading end of the second sheet in the discharge direction from the second support portion (i.e. the protruding portion is on the upper surface of 33 so contacts/supports the lower surface of the narrower sheets), wherein the protruding portion includes a top portion (see annotated Fig. 8 below) and an inclined surface (see annotated Fig. 8 below) inclined from the second support portion toward the top portion, the inclined surface inclining to be higher in the vertical direction toward a downstream side in the discharge direction and wherein the protruding portion has a height such that, over a region where the protruding portion extends in the discharge direction and when viewed in the width direction, the protruding portion overlaps with the first support portion and no part of the protruding portion protrudes above the first support portion (i.e. as in Fig. 8, the protruding portions are between 40 in the widthwise direction/overlap and at the same level as 31a, therefore no part of them protrudes above 40). Tamai does not explicitly disclose a discharge roller. Arakane discloses a discharge roller (49) configured to discharge a sheet in a discharge direction, for the purpose of discharging sheets onto discharge tray 21. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai by including the discharge roller as disclosed by Arakane, for the purpose of discharging sheets onto discharge tray 21. Regarding Claim 16 , Tamai discloses wherein the first portion includes a first wall surface (see annotated Fig. 8 below) at a boundary with the second support portion in the width direction, and the second portion includes a second wall surface (i.e. corresponding wall surface of the other 40) at a boundary with the second support portion in the width direction, the first wall surface and the second wall surface extending in the discharge direction and the vertical direction (see Fig. 8). Tamai does not disclose the distance claimed. However, since the specification is silent as to criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Tamai and Arakane by including a distance between the wall surfaces to be between 55mm and 105mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art and for the purpose of accommodating a sheet size as desired. It is noted that while the size is disclosed in [0045], no specific criticality is provided. Regarding Claim 17 , Tamai discloses wherein the first portion and the second portion incline to be higher in the vertical direction toward the downstream side in the discharge direction (i.e. see side wall surface of 40 in Fig. 8, wherein the upper longitudinal edge is seen to be ascending) . PNG media_image1.png 522 680 media_image1.png Greyscale Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 3-5 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art of record shows a discharge tray to have a wall portion extending upward from an upstream side end portion of first and second support portions ( Claims 3-5 ) or the protruding portion to be formed to extend from the first portion to the second portion in the width direction ( Claim 7 ) . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The present amendment overcomes the Kurokawa reference however Takahashi et al. still reads upon Claim 1 (not 15). Tamai is applied in the present rejection in order to address both Claims 1 and 15. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 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 PRASAD GOKHALE whose telephone number is (571)270-3543. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am - 5:30pm. 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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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. /PRASAD V GOKHALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653 June 1, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 2 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 3 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 4 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 5 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 6 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 7 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 8 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 9 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 10 Art Unit: 3653 Application/Control Number: 18/477,408 Page 11 Art Unit: 3653
Prosecution Insights