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 and 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsunashima et al. (6,221,301) in view Kugaya (2023/0314991).
Regarding claim 1, Tsunashima teaches a cooling device for cooling sheets comprising:
a drum (fig. 10, note drum) mounted for rotation about a central axis (fig. 10, axis through 10, 9), the drum including a cylindrical wall (fig. 10, item 13/14) which defines an outer surface and an inner surface (see fig. 10);
a plurality of heat pipes (fig.10, items 21) extending into an interior of the drum from the inner surface of the cylinder wall (see fig. 10).
Tsunashima does not teach wherein each of the plurality of heat pipes includes a shell, a wicking material and a working fluid which is enclosed within the shell. Kugaya teaches heat pipes with this configuration (Kugaya, [0054]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a wicking material and working fluid, as disclosed by Kugaya, to the heat pipes disclosed by Tsunashima because doing so would increase the heat dissipation characteristics of the heat pipes.
Regarding claim 3, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1, wherein the working fluid comprises water (Kugaya, [0054])).
Regarding claim 4, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of heat pipes defines a void (see fig. 10, note that all pipes have a void running through them), the working fluid traveling through the void towards a cooler end of the heat pipe when the working fluid evaporates (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note that the working fluid can travel toward the axis or toward the inner surface of the cylinder wall depending on the rotational position of the drum, and thus regardless of whether the center or outside of the drum is cooler, some water will always be travelling toward a cooler side of its pipe).
Regarding claim 5, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of heat pipes has a length L and an interior diameter D, a ratio of L:D being at least 3:1 (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note pipes are more than three times longer than they are wide).
Regarding claim 6, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of heat pipes includes a first portion, adjacent to the cylinder wall, and a second portion, extending from the first portion, wherein exterior surfaces of the first and second portions of each of the plurality of heat pipes define an angle
Regarding claim 7, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 6, wherein the first and second portions of each of the plurality of heat pipes together define a void, the working fluid traveling through the void towards a cooler end of the heat pipe when the working fluid evaporates (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note that the working fluid can travel toward the axis or toward the inner surface of the cylinder wall depending on the rotational position of the drum, and thus regardless of whether the center or outside of the drum is cooler, some water will always be travelling toward a cooler side of its pipe).
Regarding claim 8, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 6, wherein a length L1 of the first portion of each of the plurality of heat pipes is greater than a length L2 of the second portion of each of the plurality of heat pipes (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note that the first portion is being defined as a portion with a length L1 that is greater than a second portion with a length L2)
Regarding claim 9, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 6, wherein the inner surface of the cylinder wall defines a plurality of grooves, each groove receiving the first portion of at least one of the plurality of heat pipes (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note that inner wall of 13 has grooves into which pipes 21 are fitted).
Regarding claim 10, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of heat pipes includes a plurality of protrusions which provide an increased exterior surface area of the heat pipe, and optionally, wherein each of the plurality protrusions defines an interior which is accessible to a working fluid within the heat pipe (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note that the ends of heat pipes 21 protruding into wall 13 are being taken to be the claimed protrusions. Note that they increase the exterior surface by lengthening the heat pipes).
Regarding claim 11, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1, the drum further comprising an inlet (Tsunashima, fig. 10, item 9) at a first end of the drum, through which cooling fluid enters the drum interior, and an outlet (Tsunashima, fig. 10, item 10) at a second end of the drum, through which cooling fluid leaves the drum interior (Tsunashima, see fig. 10).
Claim(s) 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in Tsunashima view of Kugaya as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Facchini et al. (2015/0220052)
Regarding claim 12, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1. Tsunashima in view of Kugaya does not teach a biasing mechanism for biasing the sheets into contact with the outer surface of the cylindrical wall. Facchini teaches this (Facchini, fig. 3, Note belt as biasing member). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the cooling roller of Tsunashima in view of Kugaya as both rollers disclosed by Facchini and using a belt around those two rollers because doing so would amount to combining prior art teachings according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 13, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya and Facchini teaches the cooling device of claim 12, wherein the biasing mechanism comprises at least one of rollers and a continuous belt (Facchini, see fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the biasing mechanism of Faccini with the device of Tsunashima because doing so would amount to combining prior art teachings according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 14, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya teaches the cooling device of claim 1. Tsunashima in view of Kugaya does not teach wherein the device includes first and second counter-rotating drums. Facchini teaches this (Facchini, fig. 3, Note belt as biasing member). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the cooling roller of Tsunashima in view of Kugaya as both rollers disclosed by Facchini and using a belt around those two rollers because doing so would amount to combining prior art teachings according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 15, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya and Facchini teaches the cooling device of claim 14, wherein each of the first and second counter-rotating drums contains at least 12 heat pipes (Tsunashima, see fig. 10, Note that there are six supply pipes and six return pipes).
Regarding claim 16, Tsunashima in view of Kugaya and Facchini teaches the printing device comprising:
the cooling device of claim 1;
a first inkjet marking device (Facchini, [0033]);
a dryer which heats sheets that have been printed with the inkjet marking device (Facchini, [0033]),
the cooling device receiving heated sheets from the dryer (Facchini, fig. 6, [0033]); and
a paper path which transports sheets from the cooling device to one of the first inkjet marking device and a second inkjet marking device (Facchini, see fig. 6, Note paper travelling through paper path). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a paper path, as disclosed by Facchini, to the device disclosed by Tsunashima in view of Kugaya because doing so would amount to combining prior art teachings according to known methods to yield predictable results.
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
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 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