DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9, 10 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahashi et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0299095 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Takahashi et al. discloses
a discharge roller (290) configured to discharge a sheet in a discharge direction (i.e. left to right in Fig. 2); and
a discharge tray (216) on which the sheet discharged by the discharge roller is to be stacked, the discharge tray including a first support portion (i.e. downstream end of 216b, that rises above 216c, Fig. 4, Fig. 5), a second support portion (216a), and a protruding portion (i.e. portion of 216c),
wherein the first support portion includes a first portion (i.e. the left 216b in Fig. 4) and a second portion (i.e. the right 216b in Fig. 4) separately disposed in a width direction (i.e. left/right in Fig. 4) orthogonal to the discharge direction, 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 (Fig. 4), 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 (Fig. 4), and
wherein the protruding portion protrudes upward from the second support portion, and is configured to contact a lower surface of the sheet supported by the second support portion to separate upward a leading end of the sheet in the discharge direction from the second support portion (Fig. 4), and
wherein the protruding portion includes a top portion (i.e. see Fig. 5 mark-up below) and an inclined surface (i.e. see Fig. 5 mark-up below) inclined from the second support portion toward the top portion, and
wherein, as viewed from the width direction, the entire protruding portion is lower than the first support portion (i.e. as seen in Fig. 5, the entire 216c is lower than the downstream end of 216b). It is noted that ‘portion’ does not require a discrete part and may be taken as a partial section of any structure.
Regarding Claim 6, Takahashi et al. discloses
the discharge tray includes a plurality of the protruding portions disposed in the width direction on the second support portion (i.e. one 216c on each lateral side of 218 in Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 9, Takahashi et al. discloses
the protruding portion is a first protruding portion (i.e. from its upstream end, up to the top portion, see Fig. 5 mark-up below), and
wherein the discharge tray further includes a second protruding portion that is disposed downstream of the first protruding portion on the second support portion and protrudes upward from the second support portion (i.e. the right half of 216c in Fig. 5, that inclines upward just upstream of the peak then declines, see Fig. 5 mark-up below).
Regarding Claim 10, Takahashi et al. discloses
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. with the peak of 216c being taken as part of the second protruding portion, see Claim 9 rejection above, Fig. 5 mark-up below).
Regarding Claim 12, Takahashi et al. discloses
a feeding tray (212) on which the sheet is to be stacked; and
a feed roller (221) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray,
wherein the discharge tray is disposed below the feeding tray in the vertical direction (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 13, Takahashi et al. discloses
a feeding tray (212) on which the sheet is to be stacked;
a feed roller (221) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray; and
a reader (23) configured to read an image on the sheet fed by the feed roller,
wherein the discharge tray is disposed below the feeding tray in the vertical direction (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Takahashi et al. discloses
a feeding tray (212) on which the sheet is to be stacked;
a feed roller (221) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray;
a reader (23) configured to read an image on the sheet fed by the feed roller; and
an image forming unit (3) configured to form an image on a recording medium based on image information for the sheet read by the reader,
wherein the discharge tray is disposed below the feeding tray in the vertical direction (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Takahashi et al. discloses
a discharge roller (290) configured to discharge a sheet in a discharge direction (i.e. left to right in Fig. 2); and
a discharge tray (216) on which the sheet discharged by the discharge roller is to be stacked, the discharge tray including a first support portion (i.e. downstream end of 216b, that rises above 216c, Fig. 4, Fig. 5), a second support portion (216a), and a protruding portion (portion of 216c),
wherein the first support portion includes a first portion (i.e. the left 216b in Fig. 4) and a second portion (i.e. the right 216b in Fig. 4) separately disposed in a width direction (i.e. left/right in Fig. 4) orthogonal to the discharge direction, 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 (Fig. 4), 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 (Fig. 4), and
wherein the protruding portion protrudes upward from the second support portion, and is configured to contact a lower surface of the sheet supported by the
second support portion to separate upward a leading end of the sheet in the discharge direction from the second support portion (Fig. 4), and
wherein the protruding portion includes a top portion (i.e. see Fig. 5 mark-up below) and an inclined surface (i.e. see Fig. 5 mark-up below) inclined from the second support portion toward the top portion, and
wherein the protruding portion has a height such that, when viewed from the width direction, no part of the protruding portion protrudes above the first support portion (i.e. since the first support portion is taken as the downstream end of 216b, that rises above 216c, no part of the protruding portion 216c protrudes above the first support portion, Fig. 5). It is noted that 'portion' does not require a discrete part and may be taken as a partial section of any structure.
PNG
media_image1.png
654
512
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurokawa et al. (US Pub No. 2016/0244289 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kurokawa et al. discloses
a discharge roller (48) configured to discharge a sheet in a discharge direction (i.e. left to right in Fig. 3); and
a discharge tray (120) on which the sheet discharged by the discharge roller is to be stacked, the discharge tray including a first support portion (i.e. the upstream end of 122), a second support portion (i.e. 120A), and a protruding portion (121),
wherein the first support portion includes a first portion (leftmost 122 in Fig. 6) and a second portion (rightmost 122 in Fig. 6) separately disposed in a width direction (i.e. left/right in Fig. 6) orthogonal to the discharge direction, 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 (Fig. 6), 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 (Fig. 6), and
wherein the protruding portion protrudes upward from the second support portion, and is configured to contact a lower surface of the sheet supported by the second support portion to separate upward a leading end of the sheet in the discharge direction from the second support portion (Fig. 6), and
wherein the protruding portion includes a top portion (i.e. see Fig. 7 mark-up below) and an inclined surface (i.e. see Fig. 7 mark-up below) inclined from the second support portion toward the top portion, and
wherein, as viewed from the width direction, the entire protruding portion is lower than the first support portion (i.e. the upstream end of 122 rises above 121 as seen in Fig. 7). It is noted that ‘portion’ does not require a discrete part and may be taken as a partial section of any structure.
Regarding Claim 6, Kurokawa et al. discloses
the discharge tray includes a plurality of the protruding portions disposed in the width direction on the second support portion (i.e. the left and right inner ribs 122).
Regarding Claim 9, Kurokawa et al. discloses
the protruding portion is a first protruding portion (i.e. the upstream half of 121 in Fig. 6), and wherein the discharge tray further includes a second protruding portion that is disposed downstream of the first protruding portion on the second support portion and protrudes upward from the second support portion (i.e. the downstream half of 121 in Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 12, Kurokawa et al. discloses
a feeding tray (110) on which the sheet is to be stacked; and
a feed roller (41) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray,
wherein the discharge tray is disposed below the feeding tray in the vertical direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 13, Kurokawa et al. discloses
a feeding tray (110) on which the sheet is to be stacked;
a feed roller (41) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray; and
a reader (3) configured to read an image on the sheet fed by the feed roller,
wherein the discharge tray is disposed below the feeding tray in the vertical direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 14, Kurokawa et al. discloses
a feeding tray (110) on which the sheet is to be stacked;
a feed roller (41) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the feeding tray;
a reader (3) configured to read an image on the sheet fed by the feed roller; and
an image forming unit (5) configured to form an image on a recording medium based on image information for the sheet read by the reader,
wherein the discharge tray is disposed below the feeding tray in the vertical direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 15, Kurokawa et al. discloses
a discharge roller (48) configured to discharge a sheet in a discharge direction (i.e. left to right in Fig. 3); and
a discharge tray (120) on which the sheet discharged by the discharge roller is to be stacked, the discharge tray including a first support portion (i.e. the upstream end of 122), a second support portion (i.e. 120A), and a protruding portion (121),
wherein the first support portion includes a first portion (leftmost 122 in Fig. 6) and a second portion (rightmost 122 in Fig. 6) separately disposed in a width direction (i.e. left/right in Fig. 6) orthogonal to the discharge direction, 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 (Fig. 6), 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 (Fig. 6), and
wherein the protruding portion protrudes upward from the second support portion, and is configured to contact a lower surface of the sheet supported by the second support portion to separate upward a leading end of the sheet in the discharge direction from the second support portion (Fig. 6), and
wherein the protruding portion includes a top portion (i.e. see Fig. 7 mark-up below) and an inclined surface (i.e. see Fig. 7 mark-up below) inclined from the second support portion toward the top portion, and
wherein the protruding portion has a height such that, when viewed from the width direction, no part of the protruding portion protrudes above the first support portion (i.e. since the first support portion is taken as the upstream end of 122, that rises above 121, no part of the protruding portion 121 protrudes above the first support portion, Fig.
3, Fig. 7). It is noted that 'portion' does not require a discrete part and may be taken as a partial section of any structure.
PNG
media_image2.png
742
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0299095 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Takahashi et al. 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 Takahashi et al. by including a length of the second support portion 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.
Claim(s) 3-5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurokawa et al. (US Pub No. 2016/0244289 A1).
Regarding Claims 3-5, Kurokawa et al. discloses
the discharge tray further includes a wall portion (i.e. the vertical wall just below/to the right of 48P in Fig. 7 and at the upstream end of 122 in Fig. 6) extending upward from an upstream side end portion of each of the first support portion and the second support portion in the discharge direction (Fig. 6), but does not disclose the distance as claimed.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kurokawa et al. to have a distance from the wall portion to an upper end of the protruding portion in the discharge direction to be as claimed, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value (distance) of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art and for the purpose of accommodating a desired sheet size. It is noted that while general criticality is suggested in [0048], the basis of it (i.e. user's finger size) is fundamentally variable. It is noted this distance may be measured from the wall portion to any point along the top portion, wherein no gap/space is required between the two and the top portion may be extended as per the above.
Regarding Claim 11, Kurokawa et al. 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 Kurokawa et al. by including a length of the second support portion 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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurokawa et al. (US Pub No. 2016/0244289 A1) in view of Kurokawa (US Pub No. 2015/0091236 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Kurokawa et al. does not disclose the protruding portion to extend as claimed.
Kurokawa discloses a protruding portion (93) is formed to extend from a first portion (194) to a second portion (195) in the width direction (Fig. 7), for the purpose of accommodating a business card of size W3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Kurokawa et al. by including the protruding portion as disclosed by Kurokawa, for the purpose of accommodating a business card of size W3.
Response to Arguments
In response to Applicant’s argument that “As is apparent from Fig. 5 of Takahashi, ribs 216c, when viewed from the width direction, substantially do not overlap sheet guides 216b, and their apex projects above sheet guides 216b”, it is noted that as seen in Fig. 5 and 7-10, the downstream end of 216b does indeed rise above 216c. Therefore, the apex of 216c does not project above 216b. The claim also does not require an apex. Furthermore, as previously stated, 'portion' does not require a discrete part and may be taken as a partial section of any structure.
In response to Applicant’s argument that “Likewise, as is apparent from Fig. 7 of Kurokawa '289, protrusion 121, when viewed from the width direction, substantially does not overlap second ribs 122 and is overall higher than second ribs 122.”, it is noted that the upstream end of 122 does indeed rise above 121. Therefore, 121 is not higher than 122. Furthermore, as previously stated, 'portion' does not require a discrete part and may be taken as a partial section of any structure.
In response to Applicant’s argument that “Claim 15, as amended above, clarifies that the protruding portion includes both the top portion and the inclined surface, and specifies that, as viewed from the width direction, no part of the protruding portion projects above the first support portion”, it is noted that the claim does not require a topmost point and even if so, it pertains to a protruding portion, not a protrusion, protruding member/part, or a similar discrete structure. ‘Portion’ need not be a majority section but any part of the whole, including one that is infinitesimal.
In response to Applicant’s argument that “With respect to claim 7, Kurokawa '236 merely suggests a modified second contact portion 194 in which the second contact portion 94 extends to the rear side so as to be connected to the surface of the first contact portion 93 facing the front side and a modified third contact portion 195 in which the third contact portion 95 is connected to the thirst contact portion 93 facing the rear side.”, the device of Kurokawa ‘236 may also be taken as disclosing first and second portions analogous to 194/195, wherein protruding portion 93 extends from one to the other.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/27/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 February 11, 2026