CTFR 18/614,846 CTFR 101326 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirobumi (JP 2009029009 A) in view of Nakazawa (US 20080079795 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Hirobumi teaches a printing unit that includes a printing head configured to discharge ink from a plurality of nozzles to a medium and configured to execute printing (Fig. 1 element 100 and paragraph [0007]), a deodorizing unit (Fig. 2 element 500 and paragraph [0007] and [0046]) including a suction fan configured to suck air containing odor generated from the ink (paragraph [0044]) and a filter configured to remove the order from the air (paragraph [0012] wherein activated carbon, silica gel and activated alumina are known in the art of printers to be a filter); and a control unit including a processor configured to control the printing unit and the deodorizing unit (Fig. 4 element 550 and paragraphs [0010]), wherein the control unit controls suction by the deodorizing unit according to any one of an operation of the printing unit, print data input from an external device for printing, and an operation on the printing unit by a user (paragraph [0010]). Additionally, note that MPEP 2115 states "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." Also, MPEP 2114 states 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." Hirobumi teaches a printing head configured to discharge ink and is capable of discharging various types of ink, such as UV ink, and therefore meets the claim language as recited. However, Hirobumi does not teach a light source configured to irradiate ultraviolet (UV) light over the UV curable ink discharged onto the medium by the printing head. Nakazawa does teach a printer with a printhead (Fig. 1 element 17a to d and paragraph [0036]), with a deodorizer (Fig. 1 element 25 and paragraph [0038]) and a light source configured to irradiate ultraviolet (UV) light over the UV curable ink discharged onto the medium by the printing head (Fig. 1 elements 19a to d and paragraph [0044]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the printer of Hirobumi with the UV light of Nakawaza as a combination of 2 elements known in the art of printers, a printer with a deodorizer controlled by a processor and a UV light, to yield the predictable result of a printer capable of printing and irradiating UV curable ink that also removes odor caused by inks in response to stimuli . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 2 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printer with a deodorizer having all the structure as recited in combination with and particularly including: the control unit makes a suction force of the deodorizing unit stronger at time of executing a second operation of only performing irradiation out of discharge of without discharging the UV curable ink by the printing head and the irradiation by the emitting unit than at time of executing a first operation of simultaneously performing discharge of the UV curable ink by the printing head and the irradiation by the emitting unit. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 SAMUEL F BOELITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3391. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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. /SAMUEL FREDERICK BOELITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2853 /Manish S Shah/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/614,846 Page 2 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/614,846 Page 3 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/614,846 Page 4 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/614,846 Page 5 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/614,846 Page 6 Art Unit: 2853
Prosecution Insights