DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7-11 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 1 recites “the arrest roller” wherein the body of claim 1 requires, a first and second arrest roller. The claimed torque limiter is provided in the singular for “the arrest roller” and not recited rollers and therefore it’s not clear as to if the applicant is requiring each arrest roller to include a torque limiter or optionally either arrest roller.
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) 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al in view of Zhou et al (US Pat No 9,840,386), further in view of Okano et al (US Pat No 8,448,937).
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses a system to feed a print medium to a print zone of a printing device, comprising:
a feed roller (16) to advance a print medium in an advance direction;
an arrest roller (18) arranged below the feed roller such that the arrest roller supports the print medium if the print medium is present between the feed roller and the arrest roller, and that the feed roller abuts against the arrest roller if no print medium is present between the feed roller and the arrest roller; and
a torque limiter (28) mechanically coupled to the arrest roller.
It is noted that Lee fails to disclose multiple feeding/arrest rollers. However, Zhou discloses a similar feeding device including multiple feed roller (312) as well as multiple arrest rollers (shown in figure 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device taught by Lee to include multiple of each feed and arrest rollers to include more contact area to provide for better separation of sheets as they are fed from the stack. Such a combination would be capable, depending on the size of the sheet fed to be operable to support the print medium at the same time that the further feed roller abuts the further arrest roller.
Further, it is noted that the torque limiter and arrest roller of Lee function differently. However, Okano discloses a similar arrest roller which provides the separation of sheets required by Lee but provided with a brake roller (323, e.g. claimed arrest roller) with a controlled torque limiter which is able to variably control the torque limiter, wherein the arrest roller rotates with the feed roller and otherwise is stationary (see description of second embodiment, col 18, line 35+). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lee with the teachings of Okano to achieve the predictable result of providing the separation of sheets in an alternative, more adaptive controlled way.
The combination is capable of performing the claimed functions recited by the applicant’s claimed invention.
Regarding claim 14, Lee discloses the feed roller is movable in an engage direction such to contact an upper surface of the print medium or to be detached therefrom (via arm 50).
Regarding claim 17, the combination is capable of causing the feed roller and the further feed roller both rotate when the arrest roller supports the print medium at substantially the same time the further feed roller abuts against the further arrest roller.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is allowed.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 12-14 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Newly cited art is generally believed to be pertinent to the applicant’s amended claim aspects relating to the function of the torque limiter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick Cicchino whose telephone number is (571)270-1954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM to 5PM.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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.
/Patrick Cicchino/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights