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) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyagi (2010/0231676) in view of Oe (2014/0375739).
Regarding claim 1, Miyagi teaches an image forming apparatus comprising;
a recording head (fig. 1, item 18) in which a plurality of nozzles capable of
ejecting droplets onto a recording medium are arranged ([0052]);
an endless belt (fig. 1, item 8/13) 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);
a plurality of through holes (fig. 5, items 13b) for flashing formed in the endless belt ([0009]);
a droplet receiver (fig. 1, item 22) 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 see (figs. 2-5, Note belt 13 with through holes 13b corresponding to droplet receivers 22),
wherein the through holes for flashing are not formed in widthwise end portions which are holeless areas free from through holes (see fig. 5, note that there are no holes on end portions of the belt in the widthwise direction),
Miyagi does not teach an anti-floating member. Oe teaches an anti-floating member (Oe, fig. 2, topmost item 23 and bottommost item 23 on page) that contacts and presses downward widthwise end portions of the endless belt
Upon addition of Oe’s anti-floating member to Miyagi’s belt, the resultant device would meet the limitation that the anti-floating member contacts the widthwise end portions so as to suppress floating of the widthwise end portions.
The limitation requiring that the floating is caused by a difference in elongation resulting from the absence of the through holes in the widthwise end portions relative to a central portion of the endless belt in a widthwise direction is being taken as inherent in Miyagi as Miyagi’s belt/hole arrangement appears to be the same as that claimed and illustrated in the figures of the immediate application. That is, no specific structure has been pointed out differentiating the belt of the present invention and that of Miyagi, and as such, the belts are presumed to operate in the same manner.
Regarding claim 2, Miyagi in view of Oe 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, Miyagi in view of Oe 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, Miyagi in view of Oe teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of anti-floating members 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
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