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 21 April 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8 and 10-14 remain pending in the application. Claim 9 has been canceled. Claims 10-11 were previously withdrawn as being directed to a nonelected invention. Applicant's amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 21 January 2026; however, upon further consideration new rejections are set forth as explained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the side of the distal end" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wickenhaver (US 5,328,095).
Regarding claim 1, Wickenhaver teaches a coating device (fig. 1), comprising:
a coating gun (10) including a coating gun body (11) provided with a jet (12) and a cartridge (31) detachably attached to the coating gun body (col. 4, ln. 13-16) and housing a first coating liquid (“P”);
a transport body (19) to which the coating gun is attached (fig. 1) to move the coating gun to a predetermined coating position (col. 3, ln. 61-62); and
a relay tube (26) provided to the transport body (figs. 1, 3) to connect a coating liquid supply source disposed in a position away from the coating gun and the coating gun so that a second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source can flow therethrough (element 26 is an “air supply line”, see col. 4, ln. 6; therefore, it is considered to be capable of performing this function),
wherein the cartridge includes a lead-out tube (41) leading out the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge (fig. 4), and
formed in the coating gun is a mixing space where the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge and the second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source are mixed is formed on a downstream side of the relay tube and the lead-out tube (col. 5, ln. 1-2); and
wherein the first coating liquid corresponding to a change of a coating form of a coating target is housed in the cartridge (col. 5, ln. 7), and
the second coating liquid used in common even when the coating form of the coating target is changed is supplied via the relay tube (figs. 1, 3 – when the paint container 31 is switched the relay tube 26 will still be supplying the same liquid).
Regarding claim 2, Wickenhaver teaches a coating device (fig. 1), comprising:
a coating gun (10) including a coating gun body (11) provided with a jet (12) and a cartridge (31) detachably attached to the coating gun body (col. 4, ln. 13-16) and housing a first coating liquid (“P”);
a transport body (19) to which the coating gun is attached (fig. 1) to move the coating gun to a predetermined coating position (col. 3, ln. 61-62); and
a relay tube (26) provided to the transport body (figs. 1, 3) to connect a coating liquid supply source disposed in a position away from the coating gun and the coating gun so that a second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source can flow therethrough (element 26 is an “air supply line”, see col. 4, ln. 6; therefore, it is considered to be capable of performing this function),
wherein the cartridge includes a lead-out tube (41) leading out the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge (fig. 4), and
formed in the coating gun is a mixing space where the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge and the second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source are mixed is formed on a downstream side of the relay tube and the lead-out tube (col. 5, ln. 1-2); and
wherein the first coating liquid corresponding to a change of a coating form of a coating target is housed in the cartridge (col. 5, ln. 7), and
the second coating liquid used in common even when the coating form of the coating target is changed is supplied via the relay tube (figs. 1, 3 – when the paint container 31 is switched the relay tube 26 will still be supplying the same liquid), wherein
the cartridge houses a base compound as the first coating liquid (col. 4, ln. 41-42 – the paint), and
a cure agent is supplied as the second coating liquid via the relay tube, (This limitation is interpreted to be a statement of intended use, and it is noted that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114.II.)
wherein the base compound contains a pigment or a colorant for coloring a surface of the coating target object (col. 4, ln. 41-42 – paint is known to contain a pigment or a colorant), and
the cure agent hardens a mixture in a state of being mixed with the base compound. This limitation is a functional limitation to the cure agent, and the cure agent is recited within the intended use limitation above. Therefore, the “cure agent” is not positively recited in the claim. The structure of the coating device of Wickenhaver is capable of being used in the recited manner since it includes a relay tube capable of containing and supplying a liquid cure agent.
Regarding claim 3, Wickenhaver teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the cartridge houses a base compound as the first coating liquid (col. 4, ln. 42 – “paint”), and a cure agent is supplied as the second coating liquid via the relay tube (element 26 is an “air supply line”, see col. 4, ln. 6; therefore, it is considered to be capable of performing this function).
Regarding claim 4, Wickenhaver teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the coating gun body is provided with the mixing space (col. 5, ln. 1-2 – the internal space in the head and nozzle of the gun body) and a second coating liquid flow path (21) leading a second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source via the relay tube toward the mixing space (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, Wickenhaver teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the cartridge includes a container body housing the first coating liquid (col. 4, ln. 13; fig. 4), and the lead-out tube leads the first coating liquid in the container body toward the mixing space while the cartridge is attached to the coating gun body (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, Wickenhaver teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein formed in the coating gun body is a washing liquid flow path through which a washing liquid, which washes at least a part of a flow path through which the first coating liquid flows, flows (col. 4, ln. 62-67).
Claims 1, 7, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sandison et al. (US 5,713,519).
Regarding claim 1, Sandison teaches a coating device (110, fig. 5), comprising:
a coating gun (112) including a coating gun body (130) provided with a jet (168) and a cartridge (120) detachably attached to the coating gun body (col. 7, ln. 58—col. 8, ln. 6) and housing a first coating liquid (116F, see col. 7, ln. 1-3);
a transport body (132) to which the coating gun is attached (fig. 5) to move the coating gun to a predetermined coating position (col. 3, ln. 61-62); and
a relay tube (115) provided to the transport body (fig. 5) to connect a coating liquid supply source disposed in a position away from the coating gun and the coating gun so that a second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source can flow therethrough (element 115 is a “hose” for “pressurized fluid”, see col. 6, ln. 47-48; therefore, it is considered to be capable of performing this function),
wherein the cartridge includes a lead-out tube (122) leading out the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge (fig. 5), and
formed in the coating gun is a mixing space where the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge and the second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source are mixed is formed on a downstream side of the relay tube and the lead-out tube (fig. 7 – space downstream of 178), and
wherein the first coating liquid corresponding to a change of a coating form of a coating target is housed in the cartridge (col. 9, ln. 38-41), and
the second coating liquid used in common even when the coating form of the coating target is changed is supplied via the relay tube (fig. 5 – when the receptacle 248 is switched the relay tube 115 will still be supplying the same liquid).
Regarding claim 7, Sandison teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the cartridge includes a container body (116) housing the first coating liquid (col. 6, ln. 50-51), formed in the cartridge is the mixing space in which the first coating liquid and the second coating liquid are mixed (figs. 5, 7) and a second coating liquid flow path (174) leading the second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source via the relay tube toward the mixing space (fig. 7), the lead-out tube leads the first coating liquid in the container body toward the mixing space (fig. 11), and the first coating liquid and the second coating liquid mixed in the mixing space are supplied to the jet while the cartridge is attached to the coating gun body (fig. 5).
Regarding claim 12, Sandison teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the cartridge is provided with a valve (195) suppressing leakage of the first coating liquid from the lead-out tube in a state where the cartridge is attached to the coating gun body (col. 10, ln. 45-46).
Regarding claim 13, Sandison teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the coating gun body includes a mixing part (168) forming the mixing space (fig. 9A,B,C), and the mixing part includes a reduced diameter part gradually narrowing toward the side of the distal end (figs. 7, 8).
Regarding claim 14, Sandison teaches the coating device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein an external fluid connection part (180) that guides external fluid (fig. 5) for sending the first coating liquid to an outside of the cartridge is formed in the coating gun.
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wickenhaver in view of Yamauchi (US 2014/0151462).
Regarding claim 8, Wickenhaver discloses the coating device described regarding claim 1, and but not further wherein the coating gun includes a bell cup in which the jet is formed.
Yamauchi teaches a coating device (1, see fig. 1) comprising a coating gun (2) including a coating gun body (fig. 1) provided with a jet (7) and wherein the coating gun includes a bell cup in which the jet is formed (par. 70).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coating device of Wickenhaver to include a bell cup in which the jet is formed, as taught by Yamauchi, since this was known to atomize the paint into “countless paint particles” (Yamauchi, par. 70).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 21 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Applicant argues that Wickenhaver does not teach a configuration that mixes and ejects two liquids. In particular, Applicant notes that Wickenhaver does not teach the limitations "a relay tube provided to the transport body to connect a coating liquid supply source disposed in a position away from the coating gun and the coating gun so that a second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source can flow therethrough", the configuration that "formed in the coating gun is a mixing space where the first coating liquid housed in the cartridge and the second coating liquid supplied from the coating liquid supply source are mixed is formed on a downstream side of the relay tube and the lead-out tube", and the configuration that "the second coating liquid used in common even when the coating form of the coating target is changed is supplied via the relay tube.”
In response, it is noted that Wickenhaver is interpreted to teach each of these limitations as explained in the rejection above. Since Applicant has not identified specific issues or deficiencies with these interpretations, Applicant’s arguments are not convincing and the rejections are maintained. Even though Wickenhaver teaches a different manner of use, the structural configuration of the spray gun is identical to the claimed configuration, and the “relay tube” of Wickenhaver (element 26) is capable of and can be used to perform the recited functions (see rejection above).
Applicant’s arguments regarding Sandison have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the interpretation being used in the current rejection. Therefore, Sandison is interpreted to teach each and every limitation of amended claim 1, as explained in the rejection above.
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 CODY J LIEUWEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4477. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8-5, Friday varies.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/CODY J LIEUWEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights