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 wherein “the controller halts the flashing operation set to eject ink to the opening located at a forward proximity of the of the abnormality-detected medium.” That is, it is not understood what position would correspond to an opening “at a forward proximity of” the medium. Clarification is required.
Because all other claims depend from claim 1, they are also rejected on this basis.
Claim 3 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 “a subsequent 0next time the recording medium has arrived.” It is not understood what this means.
Claim 5 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. It is not understood what this claim is intended to mean. Clarification is required.
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) 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (2021/0402809) in view of Ueno et al. (2024/0239120).
Regarding claim 1, Ito teaches an inkjet recording apparatus comprising:
a recording head (fig. 3, item 11) for ejecting ink onto a recording medium to record an image thereon (see fig. 3);
a recording medium (fig. 3, item 8) conveyance part which is placed in opposition to the recording head and which conveys the recording medium while holding the recording medium on a top surface of a conveyor belt (see figs. 3, 6);
a controller (fig. 4, item 110) for controlling operations of the recording head, the recording medium conveyance part,
the conveyor belt as an opening that extends therethrough over a top-to-bottom range and through which ink ejected from the recording head passes (see fig. 3),
wherein the controller being enabled to execute a flashing operation ([0049]), which involves ejecting ink from the recording head and passing the ink through the opening, under a non-image recording situation in which no ink is ejected onto the recording medium ([0049).
Ito does not teach an abnormality detection part for detecting an abnormality of the recording medium conveyed toward the recording head and a retraction mechanism for moving the recording head between a recording position for execution of recording and a retraction position at a greater distance than the recording position from the conveyor belt. Ueno teaches this (Ueno, [0129], see figs. 3-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add a jam-detecting sensor and head-retracting mechanism of the type disclosed by Ueno to the device disclosed by Ito because doing so would allow for efficient processing of paper jams by Ito’s printing device.
Upon combination of Ueno with Ito, the resultant device would meet the limitation:
on condition that an abnormality of the recording medium has been detected by the abnormality detection part, the controller halts the flashing operation set to eject ink to the opening located at an abnormality-detected recording medium, and moreover instructs the retraction mechanism to move the recording head to the retraction position so as to allow the abnormality-detected recording medium to pass between the recording head and the conveyor belt. That is, the resultant prior art device would be flashing, a paper jam would be detected, the controller halt the flashing, the retraction mechanism would retract the head, the jammed medium would be fed through the conveyance path, and the head would be lowered to its original position to finish the flashing operation.
Regarding claim 2, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein after the abnormality-detected recording medium has passed through the position of the recording head, the controller instructs the retraction mechanism to move the recording head to the recording position, and resumes the flashing operation (Note that, upon combination, the prior art device would operate in this way. That is, Ueno teaches resuming printing after retracting of its printhead and clearing of a paper jam, and the same logic would apply to a flashing operation).
Regarding claim 3, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 2, wherein on condition that a subsequent 0next time the recording medium has arrived at between the recording head and the conveyor belt before resumption of the flashing operation, the controller halts image recording onto the recording medium (Note that, upon combination, this is how the resultant prior device would operate. That is, a sheet intended for printing would not be run under the printhead while the printing was executing a flashing operation).
Regarding claim 4, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 2, wherein after resumption of the flashing operation, the controller increases ink quantity to be ejected from the recording head in the flashing (Note that “increases” is relative. Note that the action of resuming flashing necessarily requires the head to eject more ink).
Regarding claim 5, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 4, when increasing the ink quantity, wherein the controller makes an increment of the ink quantity ejected, from the recording head, at each of divided plural times of the flashing operation (Note that, upon combination, this is how the resultant prior device would operate. Note that any number of droplets per unit time could be said to be an increment. Note that dividing droplets in any way would constitute increments).
Regarding claim 6, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein after the recording head has been moved to the retraction position, the controller derives a retraction start timing for starting movement of the recording head to the retraction position so as to allow the abnormality-detected recording medium to pass between the recording head and the conveyor belt, and predicts whether or not the flashing operation is executable during a period from a detection timing of the abnormality detection of the recording medium until the retraction start timing, and based on a prediction result, executes or halts the flashing operation during the period (Note that, upon combination, this is how the resultant prior device would operate).
Regarding claim 7, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller executes absolutely no image recording for the recording medium located in the position of the recording head at a time when the recording head starts to move to the retraction position (Ueno, see figs. 3-10).
Regarding claim 8, Ito in view of Ueno teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein on condition that there is an aforementioned recording medium that is underway of image recording at a time when the recording head starts to move to the retraction position, the controller halts image recording onto the recording medium, and executes the flashing operation, which is other than image recording, for the halfway-on-recording recording medium (Ueno, see figs. 3-10, Note that no image recording is carried out once retraction has started).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that 1) neither of the references teaches all claimed limitations and 2) the prior art combination has been made with impermissible hindsight. Regarding the former, Examiner maintains the prior art combination teaches all claimed limitations. Regarding the latter, Examiner maintains it would have been obvious to apply the paper jam remediation technique disclosed by Ueno to any printer that might be subject to a paper jam, such as Ito’s.
The standing prior art rejection is maintained.
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, DOUGLAS X. 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,
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, DOUGLAS X. 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853