DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notes Regarding Election/Restrictions
Examiner notes that claims 6 and 7 present distinct configurations of the detection unit. At this time, both claims will be examined. However, should future claim amendments cause the examination of both configurations to become burdensome, Applicant will be required to elect one of the configurations for further examination.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the transfer member in which “the first member is not in contact with the head, and the second member is in contact with the head” (per claim 4) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1/2) as being anticipated by Tomimatsu et al. (US 2022/0305827 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose a liquid ejection apparatus comprising:
a head (liquid ejecting head 20) configured to eject a liquid (paragraph 21);
a heat source (at least one of heaters 185, 186); and
a transfer member (at least spacer 181, head cover 23, fixing plate 29) configured to transfer heat generated by the heat source to the head (Figs. 4, 11-12),
wherein the head includes:
a nozzle plate (74) having a nozzle surface where a nozzle (N) configured to eject a liquid opens (Figs. 4, 7); and
a main body portion (at least substrates 71, 77) to which the nozzle plate is attached (Fig. 4) and which includes a supply flow path (714) in communication with the nozzle (Fig. 4), and
wherein the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate (Figs. 4, 7).
Regarding claim 2:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate and the main body portion (Figs. 4, 11-12).
Regarding claim 3:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose all the limitations of claim 2, and also that the transfer member includes:
a first member (fixing plate 29) configured to surround the nozzle plate (Figs. 4, 7); and
a second member (head cover 23) configured to surround the main body portion (Figs. 5, 11-12),
wherein the heat source is attached to the second member (Figs. 11-12), and
wherein the first member is in contact with the second member (Figs. 5, 11-12).
Regarding claim 5:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the apparatus further comprises:
a carriage (18) on which the head is mounted (Fig. 1), wherein the heat source is attached to the carriage (Figs. 8, 10).
Regarding claims 8-9:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose all the limitations of claims 1/5, and also that the transfer member holds the head (Fig. 5, 11-12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomimatsu (US 2022/0305827 A1) in view of Kamiyama (US 2008/0174627 A1).
Regarding claim 6:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose all the limitations of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose a detection unit configured to detect a temperature of a liquid.
However, Kamiyama discloses a liquid ejection apparatus that is able to warm up a head according to a detected temperature (paragraph 223) by including a detection unit (temperature sensor 91) configured to detect a temperature of a liquid (paragraph 206), wherein the detection unit is attached to the nozzle plate (Fig. 12) and detects a temperature of a liquid located in the nozzle (paragraph 206).
Therefore, at the time of filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include a detection unit, such as that taught by Kamiyama, into Tomimatsu et al.’s apparatus.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomimatsu (US 2022/0305827 A1) in view of Hagiwara et al. (US 2014/0240386 A1).
Regarding claim 7:
Tomimatsu et al. disclose all the limitations of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose a detection unit configured to detect a temperature of a liquid.
However, Hagiwara et al. disclose a liquid ejection apparatus that is able to suppress erroneous ink discharge (paragraph 12) by including a detection unit (temperature sensor 115) configured to detect a temperature of a liquid (paragraph 40), wherein the detection unit is attached to a main body portion (head main body 21: Fig. 3) and detects a temperature of a liquid located in the supply flow path (paragraph 51 & Fig. 3).
Therefore, at the time of filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include a detection unit, such as that taught by Hagiwara, into Tomimatsu et al.’s apparatus.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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.
Claim 4 appears to contain allowable subject matter because the prior art of record does not disclose or make obvious a liquid ejection apparatus comprising a transfer member having first and second members, wherein “the first member is not in contact with the head, and the second member is in contact with the head.” It is this combination of limitations, in combination with other features and limitations of claim 4, that indicates allowable subject matter over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Tanaka (US 2019/0283429 A1) disclose a liquid ejection apparatus having a heat source (50, 52) and a transfer member (60), wherein the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate (Figs. 4, 6).
Kasuga (US 2006/0262153 A1) discloses a liquid ejection apparatus having a heat source (HA) and a transfer member (HB), wherein the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate (Figs. 5, 6).
Yamamori et al. (US 2012/0092408 A1) disclose a liquid ejection apparatus having a heat source (17) and a transfer member (20), wherein the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate (paragraph 29 & Fig. 3A).
Sato et al. (US 2011/0316935 A1) disclose a liquid ejection apparatus having a heat source (56) and a transfer member (33), wherein the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate (Fig. 3).
Watanabe (US 2019/0381794 A1) disclose a liquid ejection apparatus comprising a heat source (drive circuit 80 of e.g. the central head unit 261: paragraph 37 & Fig. 3) and a transfer member (any of support plate 643, fixing plate 263, and support 265), wherein the transfer member surrounds the nozzle plate (Figs. 3-4).
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shelby L Fidler whose telephone number is (571)272-8455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am - 5pm EST.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
SHELBY L. FIDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853