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 .
Filed IDS of 04/25/2024 has been entered and considered.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending.
Please refer to the action below.
Examiner Notes
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. However, the claimed subject matter, not the specification, is the measure of the invention.
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 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) based upon a public use or sale or other public availability of the invention, therefore the claim is unpatentable over Kurotsu et al. (US 9444959, A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kurotsu teaches an image formation apparatus with a vibration generation source (at least in the Abstract and Fig. 1 teaches an image formation apparatus comprising scanning optical apparatus 10 configured with “vibration absorbing member 71 abuts the lower surface of the scanner casing 10 in the state in which the scanner casing 10 has been fixed to the upper side of the body frame 5. Furthermore, the vibration absorbing member 71 plays a role of absorbing vibration (for example, rotational vibration and the like of the photosensitive drum 31 or the fixing roller 37) generated by the image forming apparatus body 1 side”, said cited at least photosensitive drum 31 or the fixing roller 37 are indicative of the vibration generation sources), comprising:
an optical scanning device that forms an electrostatic latent image on an image carrier with a light beam based on an image signal (Fig. 1 and the disclosure further cites “a laser scanner unit (LSU: not illustrated)” as at least said optical scanning device housed in the scanner casing 10 that forms an electrostatic latent image on an image carrier with a light beam based on an image signal); and
a casing that supports the vibration generation source and the optical scanning device (scanner casing 10 of at least Fig. 1 further comprises said casing 10 that supports the vibration generation source and the optical scanning device);
wherein the optical scanning device includes a bottom surface (cited at least laser scanner of the disclosure inherently includes a mounted or seating bottom surface);
a first support leg part provided projecting downward from the bottom surface, and a second support leg part provided projecting downward from the bottom surface, the second support leg part being different from the first support leg part (at least Figs. 2-4 and the disclosure further illustrates as cited a pair of legs 51 as noted further in at least Col. 8, lines 50-51 comprising said first support leg part 51 provided projecting downward from the inherent bottom surface, and a cited second support leg part 51 provided projecting downward from the bottom surface, the second support leg part 51 being obviously located different from the first support leg part 51); and
the casing includes a first support member that comes into contact with a lower end of the first support leg part and supports the optical scanning device (at least Figs. 2-6 and the disclosure further illustrates the casing 10 includes at least scanner support surface and fixed support member 9b, members 10f/9 collectively forming the first support member that comes into contact with a lower end of the first support leg part 51 and supports the optical scanning device);
and a second support member that is provided, separated from the first support member in a non-contact state with the first support member, comes into contact with a lower end of the second support leg part, and supports the optical scanning device (at least Figs. 2-6 and the disclosure further illustrates the casing 10 includes at least scanner support surface, second fixed support member 9b, members 10f/9 collectively forming the provided second support member, separated inherently from the first support member in a non-contact state with the first support member, comes obviously into contact with a lower end of the second support leg part 51, and supports the optical scanning device).
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 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.
Claims 1-8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mamiya et al. (JP 2008/175931, A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mamiya teaches an image formation apparatus with a vibration generation source (at least in the Abstract teaches an image formation apparatus comprising scanning optical apparatus 2 where the apparatus is configured as cited in the Abstract “To reduce the pitch unevenness of scanning exposure due to the vibration at the mounting part of a scanner” due to an implied vibration generation source), comprising:
an optical scanning device that forms an electrostatic latent image on an image carrier with a light beam based on an image signal (Fig. 1 and the disclosure further cites an optical scanning device 2 that forms an electrostatic latent image on an image carrier with a light beam based on an image signal); and
a casing that supports the vibration generation source and the optical scanning device (body or optical box 5 of least the Abstract and Fig. 1 further comprises said casing that supports the vibration generation source and the optical scanning device);
wherein the optical scanning device includes a bottom surface (device 2 of at least Fig. 1 further comprises as illustrated included bottom surface 4);
a first support leg part provided projecting downward from the bottom surface, and a second support leg part provided projecting downward from the bottom surface, the second support leg part being different from the first support leg part (at least Fig.1 and the disclosure further illustrates as cited “On the right side of the lower surface of the optical box 5 of the scanning optical device 2, a pair of mounting legs 7 are fixed to the front side and the back side so as to face downward. Each of the mounting legs 7 is provided with a positioning pin 8 fixed to the left” further comprises said first and second legs 7 provided projecting downward from the bottom surface, the second support leg part being located different from the first support leg part); and
the casing includes a first support member that comes into contact with a
and a second support member that is provided, separated from the first support member in a non-contact state with the first support member,
Mamiya teaches in at least the Abstract and Figs. 1, 4, and 11-12 the supported optical scanning device 3 by the support members inside the at least scanner casing 5 except for specifically citing the above lined-out items such as said second support member comes into contact with a lower end of the second support leg part. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the teachings of Mamiya in such a way to include wherein said second support member comes into contact with a lower end of the second support leg part, as discussed above, as one skill in the art may appreciate, since the casing is known to include at least a first illustrating support stay member 3 that understoodly comes into contact with a lower of the first support leg part 7 and supports the optical scanning device 2, similarly to the second stay support member similarly supporting the optical scanning device 2, that said second support member may obviously have come into contact with a lower end of the second support leg part similar to the first support member, since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining
elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art ( In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184), according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 2 (according to claim 1), Mamiya further teaches wherein the casing further includes a side surface having an insertion part for inserting the optical scanning device into the casing (at least the Abstract further teaches as cited “The image forming apparatus provided with the scanning optical apparatus 2 which is mounted by being inserted substantially horizontally with respect to the body of the image forming apparatus” further insinuating included side surface having an insertion part for inserting the optical scanning device into the casing).
Regarding claim 3 (according to claim 2), Mamiya further teaches wherein the first support member is a plate-like member horizontally arranged adjacent to the insertion part (at least stay member 3 or stay member 4 Figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 4 (according to claim 2), Mamiya further teaches wherein the first support member guides the optical scanning device that is inserted into the casing through the insertion part (at least stay member 3 or stay member 4 Figs. 2-4).
Regarding claim 5 (according to claim 2), Mamiya further teaches wherein the first support member comes into contact with the bottom surface of the optical scanning device inserted into the casing through the insertion part and guides the optical scanning device (as further understood in at least Figs. 2-4 stay members 3 or 4 comes into contact with the bottom surface of the optical scanning device 3 inserted into the casing through the insertion means and guides the optical scanning device).
Regarding claim 6 (according to claim 5), Mamiya further teaches wherein the optical scanning device has a projection part provided projecting from the bottom surface (the at least protrusions or projecting parts 10 and/or projecting part 11 of the disclosure provided projecting from the bottom surface).
Regarding claim 7 (according to claim 6), Mamiya further teaches wherein the first support member comes into contact with a tip end of the projection part and guides insertion of the optical scanning device (the at least Fig. 2 further teaches a support member 3 comes into contact with a tip end of the projection part 10/11 and guides as understood in the art insertion of obviously the optical scanning device 2).
Regarding claim 8 (according to claim 3), Mamiya further teaches wherein the second support member is provided adjacent to a downstream side of the first support member in an insertion direction of the optical scanning device (at least Figs. 2-4 further illustrates second support member 4 is provided adjacent to a downstream side of the first support member 3 in an insertion direction of the optical scanning device).
Regarding claim 10 (according to claim 1), Mamiya further teaches wherein the casing includes a frame separately fixing the first support member and the second support member (at least Figs. 1-12 further illustrates casing 5 includes a frame separately fixing the first support member 3 and the second support member 4).
Claims Standings
Claim 9 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. The prior arts of record are readily apparent to specifically teach: claim 9. The image formation apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the first support member includes a first support surface that comes into contact with the lower end of the first support leg part, the second support member includes a second support surface that comes into contact with the lower end of the second support leg part, and the second support surface is at a position higher than the first support surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCELLUS AUGUSTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3384. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 5 PM.
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, BENNY TIEU can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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.
/MARCELLUS J AUGUSTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682 02/10/2026