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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02 May 2024 and 04 September 2024 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 8 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yamanobe et al. (US 2017/0021612 – hereinafter Yamanobe.)
Regarding claim 1,
Yamanobe discloses a printing apparatus [1 in fig. 1] comprising:
a printhead [22 in fig. 1] having a plurality of nozzle arrays [24C/24M/24Y/24K in figs. 1-2] each of which is formed by a plurality of nozzles [N in fig. 2; paragraphs 0084-0085];
a conveyance unit [10 in fig. 1] that conveys a printing medium [P in fig. 1] relative to the printhead at a predetermined speed [paragraph 0080];
a storage unit [48 in fig. 3] that stores a correction value for changing timing of ink ejection in accordance with displacement between the nozzle arrays [paragraph 0119];
a switching unit that switches operation between print operation for printing an image [as seen in the ‘image region’ in fig. 10; paragraph 0083] and inspection operation for printing an image [test chart 90 in fig. 10; paragraph ] based on nozzle inspection data, without stopping conveyance operation performed by the conveyance unit [implicit since it occurs during the execution of the print job; paragraph 0130; also, see figs. 13-14]; and
a first generation unit [40 in fig. 3] that generates, based on the correction value, a signal for ejecting ink from the printhead [paragraph 0119], wherein
the first generation unit switches the correction value from valid to invalid in synchronization with switch from the print operation to the inspection operation performed by the switching unit [since the data for image formation and the data used for the test chart / inspection operation are different, it is implicit that the correction value will not be used/valid during the inspection operation.]
Regarding claim 8,
Yamanobe further discloses wherein
in the printhead, the plurality of nozzle arrays are disposed in a first direction [as seen in fig. 1, same direction as indicated by arrow ‘D’ in fig. 2],
the plurality of nozzles in each of the plurality of nozzle arrays are disposed in a second direction intersecting with the first direction [as seen in fig. 2], and
the conveyance unit conveys the printing medium relative to the printhead in the first direction [paragraph 0087.]
Regarding claims 13 and 14,
The steps of this control method claim (and corresponding non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute said control method) are deemed to be inherent in view of the functions of the apparatus disclosed above, since it would be necessary to perform the claimed method steps in order for the apparatus to perform its intended functions.
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.
Claims 2, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanobe in view of Murase et al. (US 2020/0047491 – hereinafter Murase.)
Regarding claim 2,
Yamanobe discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above but fails to expressly disclose the printing apparatus according further comprising:
a second generation unit that generates ejection data for ejecting the ink to the printing medium; and
a buffer in which to store the ejection data generated by the second generation unit, the ejection data having first ejection data for the print operation and second ejection data for the inspection operation.
In the same field of endeavor, Murase discloses a printing apparatus comprising:
a printhead [30 in fig. 1] having a plurality of nozzle arrays each of which is formed by a plurality of nozzles [paragraphs 0045-0046];
a conveyance unit [1B in fig. 1] that conveys a printing medium [P in fig. 1] relative to the printhead at a predetermined speed [paragraph 0076];
a storage unit [132 in fig. 4] that stores a correction value for changing timing of ink ejection [complementary printing] in accordance with displacement between the nozzle arrays [paragraphs 0132, 0151-0152 and 0195-0197];
a switching unit that switches operation between print operation [printing mode] for printing an image [in image area L1] and inspection operation [inspection mode] for printing an image [in inspection area L2] based on nozzle inspection data, without stopping conveyance operation performed by the conveyance unit [paragraph 0141-0149; also, see flowchart in fig. 18];
a first generation unit [13B in fig. 5, which includes printing control unit 15A] that generates, based on the correction value, a signal for ejecting ink from the printhead [s100 in fig. 18; paragraphs 0132 and 0196-0197; also, see paragraph 0091];
second generation unit [13A in fig. 5, which includes image processing unit 134] that generates ejection data for ejecting the ink to the printing medium [paragraphs 0087-0091]; and
a buffer [136 in fig. 5] in which to store the ejection data generated by the second generation unit, the ejection data having first ejection data for the print operation [S10 in fig. 18] and second ejection data for the inspection operation [S50 in fig. 18; also, see paragraphs 0089 and 0132.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Yamanobe invention to include a second generation unit that generates ejection data for ejecting the ink to the printing medium, and a buffer in which to store the ejection data generated by the second generation unit, the ejection data having first ejection data for the print operation and second ejection data for the inspection operation as taught by Murase for the purpose of preventing printhead data bottlenecks, and maintaining print quality without interrupting the ongoing printing job.
Regarding claim 9,
In the obvious combination, Murase further discloses wherein the printhead has a sensor [9A / 9B in fig. 1] for detecting a state of ink ejection from the nozzles [paragraphs 0007-0008 and 0082-0083.]
Regarding claim 11,
In the obvious combination, Murase further discloses wherein an image printed using the second ejection data based on the inspection data is disposed between a first image and a second image printed using the first ejection data [as seen in fig. 18, after performing the print for inspection, if the print continues (in step S80), the method switches over the operation mode of the printhead to once again print an image.]
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 10, and 12 are 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3,
The primary reason for allowance for this claim is the inclusion of the limitations of claim 2 (and therefore also claim 1), further including wherein
based on a first signal in synchronization with conveyance of the printing medium, a second signal for informing of a zone for the print operation, and a third signal for informing of a zone for the inspection operation, the first generation unit generates, using the correction value, a fourth signal for informing of timing to obtain data for each nozzle array, a fifth signal for informing of ink ejection timing, and a sixth signal for informing of timing of detection for nozzle inspection,
the first generation unit receives input of a switch signal for switching the correction value between valid and invalid, and
the switch signal is generated based on the third signal.
It is these limitations, in combination as claimed, that have not been taught, found, or suggested by prior art.
Regarding claims 4-7, 10, and 12,
These claims are considered to have allowable subject matter due to their dependency on claim 3.
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANNELLE M LEBRON whose telephone number is (571)272-2729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
/JANNELLE M LEBRON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights