DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazawa (7,090,341) in view of Miyazawa et al. (2002/0154200) and Yamamoto et al. (6,824,258).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Miyazawa teaches a print liquid supply interface structure to fluidically connect a fluid supply container to a receiving station, the print quid supply interface structure comprising:
a reservoir (fig. 3, item 33), and
a print liquid supply interface structure (fig. 4, item 23 and entire bottom surface of cartridge 3) to fluidically connect the reservoir to a receiving station, the print liquid supply interface structure including:
a liquid interface (fig. 4, item 23 and entire bottom surface of cartridge 3) fluidically couplable to a needle (see fig. 4, note that a needle is necessarily inserted into the ink supply port 23) of the receiving station, the liquid interface including a seal (see fig. 4, note that, if there was not a seal, ink would leak out of the cartridge, and thus there is necessarily a seal); and
a needle receiving portion (fig. 4, item 23) extending up to the liquid interface defining a needle insertion direction (fig. 4, upward on page);
a liquid channel (see figs. 10, 11, channel from 71 the interface 23) to fluidically connect the liquid interface to a reservoir (see figs. 10, 11) of the fluid supply container,
the liquid channel to fluidically connect the liquid interface to a reservoir of the fluid supply container, the liquid channel defining a liquid flow path for fluid to flow from a liquid channel input (figs. 10, 11, item 71) wherein the liquid channel input is positioned relative to the liquid interface such that fluid flows in a first direction (fig. 10, horizontal on page, fig. 11, into page) perpendicular to the needle insertion direction (figs. 10, 11, downward on page), in a second direction (fig. 11, horizontal on page on route 5), perpendicular to the first direction and perpendicular to the needle insertion direction (see figs. 10, 11), and then opposite the needle insertion direction to the liquid interface (see illustration below), wherein the reservoir connecting portion includes the liquid channel input at an upstream end thereof (see illustration below, Note that “liquid interface” has not been defined with much specificity, and ).
PNG
media_image1.png
486
824
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Miyazawa ‘341 does not teach a single monolithic molded body includes a support wall, a guide slot to engage a guide rail of the receiving station and a liquid interface projecting from the support wall, at least one integrated circuit contact pad disposed on an inner surface of the support wall. Miyazawa ‘200 teaches this (Miyazawa ‘200, see fig. 8, 9A, 11, Note that item 1 is a single monolithic molded body. Note that the support wall is being defined as the whole body 1 as the wall contains a liquid. Note that liquid interface 14 and guide slot 60 can be said to protrude from any portion of the body 1 and thus from a portion of the support wall. Note that “support wall” has not itself been defined in any way that precludes the present interpretation. Note that integrated circuit contact pad 77 is mounted to the wall. Note that “inner surface of the support wall” has not been defined in any way. Note guide rail 204). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to add the interface disclosed by Miyazawa ‘200 to the reservoir disclosed by Miyazawa ‘341 because doing so would amount to combining a known interface structure with a known liquid reservoir to obtain predictable results. In other words, because Miyazawa ‘341 does not go into detail about the exterior of its cartridge, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art to look to Miyazawa ‘200 for such a teaching.
Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 does not go into any significant detail about its interface structure and thus does not teach wherein the reservoir connecting portion of the liquid channel, the liquid interface, at least one guide slot, and at least one integrated circuit contact pad are formed in that order of the interface structure, the guide slot disposed on an edge opposite the reservoir connecting portion and the contact pad disposed between the guide slot and the liquid interface along the second direction. Yamamoto teaches this (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6, 9, Note connecting portion 28B and liquid interface 28, integrated circuit with contacts 18/19/26, and guide slot in item 22 in that order in the second direction. Note that guide slot engages with guide rail 34 of receiving station 32). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to add the interface disclosed by Yamamoto to the reservoir disclosed by Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 because doing so would amount to combining a known interface structure with a known liquid reservoir to obtain predictable results. In other words, because Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 does not go into detail about the exterior of its cartridge, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art to look to Yamamoto for such a teaching.
Further, it should be noted that according to MPEP 2144.04, using a one-piece construction instead of a previously disclosed structure is an obvious engineering choice unless it produces a new and unexpected result. Here, it is not clear what new and unexpected result is obtained by the monolithic structure of the claimed invention, and thus the one-piece construction is being taken as obvious.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 1 and 11, an integrated circuit including at least one contact pad having a contact pad surface approximately perpendicular to the first direction (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 2 and 12, respectively, wherein the at least one contact pad is offset from the liquid interface along the second direction (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 1 and 11, respectively, further comprising a front push area adjacent the liquid interface, the front push area to contact a protective structure of the receiving station to facilitate passage of a needle into the liquid interface (Yamamoto, note that any portion of the interface contacting the receiving structure can be said to meet the limitation).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 1 and 11, respectively, further comprising a guide feature to facilitate entry of a needle along the needle insertion direction (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6, Note guide/identification slots on 22/23 on both sides that “facilitate entry” of the needle on insertion).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 5 and 15, respectively, wherein the guide feature comprises a guide slot to engage a guide rail on the receiving station to prevent movement in the first direction and the second direction (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6, Note guide/identification slots on 22/23 on both sides that “facilitate entry” of the needle on insertion).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 6 and 16 respectively, wherein the guide slot is adjacent the liquid interface in the first direction, and wherein the guide slot extends along the print liquid supply interface parallel to the needle insertion direction (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6, Note guide/identification slots on 22/23 on both sides.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 5 and 15, respectively, wherein the guide feature comprises lateral guide slots on opposite ends of the print liquid supply interface, the lateral guide slots to engage guide rails on the receiving station to prevent movement in the first direction and the second direction (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto Nagashima teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 8 and 18, respectively, wherein the lateral guide slots are on the opposite edges of the print liquid supply interface on the opposite sides of the liquid interface different from a side of the liquid interface structure including a reservoir connecting portion of the liquid channel to fluidically connect the liquid channel to the reservoir, and wherein the lateral guide slots extend along the print liquid supply interface parallel to the needle insertion direction (Yamamoto, see fig. 4-6).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 1 and 11, respectively, further comprising a recess in a front wall of the print liquid supply interface structure adjacent the liquid interface (Yamamoto, see figs. 4-6, Note recess 40).
Regarding claims 21 and 23, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 1 and 11, wherein the single monolithic molded body includes a support wall (Yamamoto, fig. 6, note wall around entirety of item 21), and wherein the at least one guide slot (Yamamoto, figs. 2-6, note that slots in 22, 23 project outward from wall 21) and the liquid interface project from the support wall (Miyazawa ‘341,see illustration above, Yamamoto, figs. 2-6, Note that upon combination, any portion of the bottom of Yamamoto’s reservoir 14 can be said to “project from” the support wall. Note that Merriam Webster’s online dictionary defines “project” as “cause to jut out.” Any one the components shown can be said to “jut out” from the support wall because any all the components occupy different spaces from the support wall. The dictionary definition does not require that both of the thing projecting from and the thing projected from are part of the same whole).
Further, it should be noted that according to MPEP 2144.04, using a one-piece construction instead of a previously disclosed structure is an obvious engineering choice unless is produces a new an unexpected result. Here, it is not clear what new and unexpected result is obtained by the monolithic structure of the claimed invention, and thus the one-piece construction is being taken as obvious.
Regarding claims 22 and 24, Miyazawa ‘341 in view of Miyazawa ‘200 and Yamamoto teaches the print liquid supply interface structure of claims 21 and 23, respectively, wherein the at least one integrated circuit contact pad is disposed on an inner surface of the support wall (Yamamoto, see figs. 7, 8, item 18).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, RICARDO MAGALLANES can be reached at 571-202-5960. 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights