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.
Claim 1 is 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. The claim recites all of “end portions of the endless belt in a widthwise direction of the endless belt,” “end portions in the widthwise direction of the endless belt,” and just “end portions.” While it is assumed the three recitations are intended to refer to the same portions, the language is nonetheless indefinite. Correction is required.
Because all other claims depend from claim 1, they are also rejected on this basis.
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) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oe (2014/0375739) in view of Miyagi (2010/0231676).
Regarding claim 1, Oe teaches an image forming apparatus comprising;
a recording head (fig. 1, item 21) in which a plurality of nozzles capable of
ejecting droplets onto a recording medium are arranged ([0035]);
an endless belt (fig. 2, item 11) that conveys the recording medium toward a position where an image is to be formed on the recording medium by the recording head (see fig. 1);
an anti-floating member (fig. 2, topmost item 23 and bottommost item 23 on page) that prevents floating of end portions of the endless belt in a widthwise direction of the endless belt (see figs. 1, 2, Note that rollers 23 prevent anything from floating, whether it is the belt or a print medium),
wherein the anti-floating member contacts and presses downward the end portions free from through holes.
Oe does not teach a plurality of through holes for flashing formed in the endless belt or a droplet receiver that receives flashing droplets having been ejected from the nozzle by flashing without contributing to formation of the image and having passed through the through holes, wherein the through holes for flashing are not formed in the end portions in the widthwise direction of the endless belt.
Miyagi teaches this (Miyagi, see figs. 2-5, Note belt 13 with through holes 13b corresponding to droplet receivers 22, and note that there are no holes on end portions of the belt in the widthwise direction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the through holes and droplet receivers disclosed by Miyagi to the belt arrangement disclosed by Oe because doing so would allow for flashing the recording head, thereby maintaining fresh nozzles.
Regarding claim 2, Oe in view of Miyagi teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the anti-floating member comprises a rotator that holds down the end portions of the endless belt, and the rotator is freely rotatable along a direction of movement of the endless belt (Oe, see figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, Oe in view of Miyagi teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recording head and the anti-floating member are provided in a head unit (Oe, see figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 4, Oe in view of Miyagi teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein are provided and the plurality of anti-floating members are respectively allocated upstream and downstream sides of the recording head in a direction of movement of the endless belt (Oe, see figs. 1-3, Note that any head can be said to have rollers upstream and downstream).
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