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 amended claims filed November 24, 2025 have been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 12 and 13 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.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orelli (US20020054292A1) in view of Masuda (US20200269607A1).
Regarding claim 1, Orelli teaches a color measurement apparatus (Fig. 1) to which a colorimeter (paragraph [0039] discloses color measuring head determines color colorimetrically, which the examiner is interpreting to mean by a colorimeter) that measures a color of a color measurement target is configured to be attached ('color measuring head', paragraph [0013]), the color measurement apparatus comprising:
a support base that supports the color measurement target (12, Fig. 1; paragraph [0027]);
a carriage that supports the colorimeter (30, Fig. 1);
a gantry that supports the carriage (13, Fig. 1);
a first scanning mechanism ('displacement unit', paragraph [0043]) that causes the carriage to perform scanning in a first direction on the support base (y-direction, paragraph [0043]); and
a second scanning mechanism ('second displacement unit', paragraph [0044]) that causes the gantry to perform scanning in a second direction intersecting the first direction (x-direction, paragraph [0044]), wherein
the first scanning mechanism includes a first motor that generates a driving force for causing the carriage to perform scanning in the first direction (paragraph [0043] discloses a motor that drives a belt which moves the color measuring head), and a first transmission mechanism portion that transmits the driving force from the first motor to the carriage (paragraph [0043] discloses a belt, which transmits the driving force from the motor),
Orelli fails to teach the gantry includes the first motor, and
the first motor overlaps the gantry in a third direction intersecting orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor of scanning mechanism support devices, Masuda discloses a gantry (4, Fig. 1) which includes a motor (21, Fig. 1) which moves a carriage (5, Fig. 1) and overlaps the gantry in a third direction orthogonal to the first and second movement directions (the examiner is interpreting a third direction to be the direction the motor projects, which is the z-direction in Fig. 1. The carriage moves in the x-direction, and the gantry moves in the y-direction, as shown by the coordinate system in Fig. 1).
Placing the motor that moves the carriage onto the gantry allows for a more compact and simplified device (see Fig. 1 of Masuda). Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would find it obvious to combine the color measurement apparatus of Orelli with the placement of the carriage motor on the gantry as taught in Masuda in order to make a simpler and more compact device.
Regarding claim 3, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches a rotation shaft of the first motor is along the third direction (Orelli: examiner is interpreting the rotation axis of the motor (shown by the black dot of 243 in Fig. 8) to be in the z-direction), and
the first transmission mechanism portion, and an endless belt that transmits the driving force (Orelli: 243, Fig. 8; paragraph [0043]).
Orelli does not explicitly state the use of a pulley. However, the examiner is interpreting the circles at the end of the belt (243, Fig. 8) to be a type of pulley, thus their rotation axis would be in the third direction.
Further, a pulley is a well-known and widely used device to move an object on a belt or cable. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be able to use the known technique to improve a similar device in the same way to enable the transmission of a driving force to move an object.
Regarding claim 4, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches the second scanning mechanism includes a second motor (Orelli: 263 includes a motor, Fig. 7; paragraph [0044]) that generates a driving force for displacing the gantry in the second direction (Orelli: x-direction, paragraph [0044]) in a main body portion having the support base, and a second transmission mechanism having a belt that transmits the driving force from the second motor to the gantry (Orelli: 263, Fig. 7) and
the second motor is provided on a center side of the main body portion with respect to the belt when viewed from the third direction (the examiner is interpreting the “center side” to be the side in-between the outer edges of the device, as shown by the motor, 47, in Fig. 5 of the current application as published in US20240302211A1. The motor in 263, Fig. 7 is in between the outer edges of the device).
Regarding claim 5, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 4, and further teaches the second motor is provided at a position for overlapping the gantry when viewed from the third direction (the examiner is interpreting Fig. 8 to show the view from the third direction. Fig. 9 shows the second motor (in 263) parallel to 261 or perpendicular to 220. Therefore, in Fig. 8, the second motor would be overlapping the gantry (if it is attached to the carriage (230) in the same manner as Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 5, and further teaches an embodiment where the second motor and the second transmission mechanism are provided at positions not protruding from the support base in the third direction (all elements can be provided in a housing (100, Fig.3) which is part of the base, paragraph [0042]).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the two embodiments of Orelli in order to make the device more compact and save space.
Regarding claim 12, Orelli teaches a color measurement apparatus (Fig. 1) to which a colorimeter (paragraph [0039] discloses color measuring head determines color colorimetrically, which the examiner is interpreting to mean by a colorimeter) that measures a color of a color measurement target is configured to be attached ('color measuring head', paragraph [0013]), the color measurement apparatus comprising:
a support base that supports the color measurement target (12, Fig. 1; paragraph [0027]);
a carriage that supports the colorimeter (30, Fig. 1);
a gantry that supports the carriage (13, Fig. 1);
a first scanning mechanism ('displacement unit', paragraph [0043]) that causes the carriage to perform scanning in a first direction on the support base (y-direction, paragraph [0043]); and
a second scanning mechanism ('second displacement unit', paragraph [0044]) that causes the gantry to perform scanning in a second direction intersecting the first direction (x-direction, paragraph [0044]), wherein the first scanning mechanism includes:
a first motor that generates a driving force to move the carriage in the first direction (paragraph [0043]); and
a first transmission mechanism portion that transmits the driving force from the first motor to the carriage (belt - paragraph [0043]),
the second scanning mechanism includes a second motor that generates a driving force for displacing the gantry in the second direction in a main body portion having the support base (263 includes a motor, Fig. 7; paragraph [0044]); and a second transmission mechanism that has a belt that transmits the driving force from the second motor to the gantry (263, Fig. 7); and
the second motor is provided on a center side of the main body portion with respect to the belt when viewed from the third direction (the examiner is interpreting the “center side” to be the side in-between the outer edges of the device, as shown by the motor, 47, in Fig. 5 of the current application as published in US20240302211A1. The motor in 263, Fig. 7 is in between the outer edges of the device).
Orelli fails to teach the gantry includes the first motor,
the first motor overlaps the gantry in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction.
However, Masuda discloses a gantry (4, Fig. 1) which includes a motor (21, Fig. 1) which moves a carriage (5, Fig. 1) and overlaps the gantry in a third direction orthogonal to the first and second movement directions (the examiner is interpreting a third direction to be the direction the motor projects, which is the z-direction in Fig. 1. The carriage moves in the x-direction, and the gantry moves in the y-direction, as shown by the coordinate system in Fig. 1).
As discussed above in claim 1, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would find it obvious to combine the color measurement apparatus of Orelli with the placement of the carriage motor on the gantry as taught in Masuda in order to make a simpler and more compact device.
Regarding claim 13, Orelli teaches a color measurement apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
a support base that supports a color measurement target (12, Fig. 1; paragraph [0027]);
a color measurement portion that measures a color of the color measurement target ('color measuring head', paragraph [0013]);
a carriage that supports the color measurement portion (30, Fig. 1);
a gantry that supports the carriage (13, Fig. 1);
a first scanning mechanism ('displacement unit', paragraph [0043]) that causes the carriage to perform scanning in a first direction on the support base (y-direction, paragraph [0043]); and
a second scanning mechanism ('second displacement unit', paragraph [0044]) that causes the gantry to perform scanning in a second direction intersecting the first direction (x-direction, paragraph [0044]), wherein
the first scanning mechanism includes a first motor that generates a driving force for causing the carriage to perform scanning in the first direction (paragraph [0043] discloses a motor that drives a belt which moves the color measuring head), and a first transmission mechanism portion that transmits the driving force from the first motor to the carriage (paragraph [0043] discloses a belt, which transmits the driving force from the motor).
Orelli fails to teach the gantry includes the first motor, and
the first motor overlaps the gantry in a third direction intersecting orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction.
However, Masuda discloses a gantry (4, Fig. 1) which includes a motor (21, Fig. 1) which moves a carriage (5, Fig. 1) and overlaps the gantry in a third direction orthogonal to the first and second movement directions (the examiner is interpreting a third direction to be the direction the motor projects, which is the z-direction in Fig. 1. The carriage moves in the x-direction, and the gantry moves in the y-direction, as shown by the coordinate system in Fig. 1).
As discussed above in claim 1, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would find it obvious to combine the color measurement apparatus of Orelli with the placement of the carriage motor on the gantry as taught in Masuda in order to make a simpler and more compact device.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orelli (US20020054292A1) in view of Masuda (US20200269607A1) as applied above in claim 1, in further view of Yasuhiro (JP2013184430A).
Regarding claim 2, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, but fails to teach an electric substrate that is provided on the carriage and moves in conjunction with the carriage; and
a harness member that is disposed along the first direction in the gantry and is coupled to the electric substrate, wherein
the first motor overlaps an area in which the harness member is disposed in the third direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor of optical sensors on movable carriages, Yasuhiro teaches a carriage which has a motor (3, Fig. 1) and is connected to an electric substrate (33, Fig. 4) on the carriage (33 is in 13, Fig. 1) via a harness that is disposed along the first direction (direction carriage moves; housing, 32, Fig. 4). While the position of the motor is not disclosed, the examiner is interpreting it to be a part of the carriage (paragraph [0011] describes the motor as the carriage motor). Thus, it would overlap the area of the harness (9, Fig. 1).
Electric substrates are commonly used as controls (Yasuhiro: paragraph [0015] discloses the substrate is a controller). Controllers are well-known and widely used as a way to automate the functions of a device. It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the device taught in Orelli as modified by Masuda with the electric substrate and harness member taught in Yasuhiro as a way to automate the device.
Claims 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orelli (US20020054292A1) in view of Masuda (US20200269607A1) as applied above in claim 1, in further view of Masako (JP2018052107A).
Regarding claim 7, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and Orelli further teaches an operation portion that receives an operation instruction (Masuda: computer, paragraph [0031]).
Orelli as modified by Masuda fails to teach the operation portion is provided at a position for overlapping the first motor when viewed from the third direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor of color measurement devices, Masako teaches an operation portion ('control device' - 200, Fig. 1) which overlaps the motor (6, Fig. 1) when viewed from at least one of the directions.
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the device of Orelli as modified by with the overlapping operation portion taught in Masako as a way to save space and make the device more compact.
Regarding claim 8, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, but fails to teach a third direction movement mechanism that moves the carriage in the third direction with respect to the gantry, wherein
the third direction movement mechanism has a third motor, which generates a driving force for moving the carriage in the third direction, in the carriage.
However, Masako teaches a third direction (z-direction, paragraph [0034]) movement mechanism ('change unit' - 40, Fig. 4) which moves the carriage (paragraphs [0049], [0054]) through the use of a motor ('lift drive motor' - paragraph [0053]).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the device of Orelli as modified by Masuda with the third direction movement mechanism taught in Masako as direction in three directions allows for highly accurate color measurement (paragraph [0007]) by enabling the best measurement positions (paragraph [0008]).
Regarding claim 9, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 8, but fails to teach the third motor is provided at a position overlapping the first motor in the third direction.
However, Masako teaches the third motor is inside the carriage (40 is in 3, Fig. 35), the examiner is interpreting the third motor would overlap the first motor in the third direction at some point as the carriage moves.
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the first motor taught in Orelli as modified by Masuda with the third motor capable of overlapping taught in Masako as a way to make the device more compact.
Regarding claim 10, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, but fails to teach the third motor is provided at a position overlapping the first motor in the second direction.
However, Masako teaches the third motor is inside the carriage (40 is in 3, Fig. 35), the examiner is interpreting the third motor would overlap the first motor in the second direction at some point as the carriage moves.
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the first motor taught in Orelli as modified by Masuda with the third motor capable of overlapping taught in Masako as a way to make the device more compact.
Regarding claim 11, Orelli as modified by Masuda teaches the invention as explained above in claim 8, but fails to teach the third direction movement mechanism has a plurality of gears that transmit the driving force of the third motor, and
the gears include a worm gear.
However, Masako teaches the third direction movement mechanism ('change unit', paragraphs [0049], [0054]) includes a plurality of gears (5a and 5C, Fig. 4).
The use of gears is well-known and widely used to transmit mechanical movement. Further, a worm gear is also well-known in the art. Thus, a person having ordinary skill in the art would be able to use the known technique of using gears as taught in Masako and substitute the gear train (5c, Fig. 4) with a worm gear to improve the device of Orelli as modified by Masuda in the same way to enable to transmittance of a driving force from the motor to the carriage.
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the device taught in Orelli as modified by Masuda with the gears taught in Masako in order to improve the device of Orelli as modified by Masuda in the same way to enable to transmittance of a driving force from the motor to the carriage.
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 Alexandria Mendoza whose telephone number is (571)272-5282. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur 9:00 - 6:00 CDT.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 270-5789. 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.
/ALEXANDRIA MENDOZA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877