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 .
This office action is in response to applicants arguments dated 03 February 2026. Claims 1-12 are pending in the application. Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-12 have been amended.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of Korean Application No. KR10-2021-0152412 was received on 10 June 2024 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. However, the certified copy of Korean Application No. KR10-2022-0145808 has not been received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 January 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 06 May 2024 are accepted.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Day et al. (US PGPub 2002/0018108 A1), hereinafter Day, in view of Shashou et al. (US PGPub 2021/0120935 A1), hereinafter Shashou.
With regard to Claim 1, print device (Fig. 3; printer 24) comprising:
a body defining an appearance (Fig. 3; print body 24; ¶0039);
a coupling unit disposed in the body to enable physical coupling to an auxiliary device (¶0039, holder 40 or ink cartridge within print device 24);
a recognition unit disposed in the body to recognize the auxiliary device and determine whether the coupling unit is coupled to the auxiliary device (¶0040, electronics of the printer are controlled bu the printer’s software; and
a control unit, wherein, when the recognition unit recognizes that the auxiliary device is not coupled to the coupling unit, the control unit is configured to set the print device to perform a basic function, which is the printing (Claims 6-12, Figs. 2-4, when ink cartridge is mounted, printing is performed; when machining devices are mounted, the auxiliary function is performed), and
when the recognition unit recognizes that the auxiliary device is coupled to the coupling unit, the control unit is configured to set the auxiliary device to perform an individual function changed from the basic function (Claims 6-12, Figs. 2-4, when ink cartridge is mounted, printing is performed; when machining devices are mounted, the auxiliary function is performed).
Although Day discloses performing an individual function based on the attached device as set forth above, Day does not explicitly disclose “recognizing that the auxiliary device is coupled to the coupling unit”. However, there must be some type of recognition of the attached auxiliary device, such that this feature is seen as an inherent teaching of the device in order for the printer software and processor to perform the function, in order to function as intended.
Regardless, the secondary reference of Shashou discloses wherein a recognition unit recognizes that the auxiliary device is coupled to the coupling unit (consumable pod 1600 may include one or more of systems 300, 400, 500, 600, 700; ¶0781, activation method when consumable cartridge 1600 is within the designated receiver enclosure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the recognition and activation method of Shashou, with the print device of Day, in order to perform an operation of the one or more of the systems operations, as taught by Shashou (¶0027).
With regard to Claim 3, Day does not explicitly disclose wherein the recognition unit includes a communication module, and the auxiliary device coupled through wired or wireless communication is recognized by using the communication module.
The secondary reference of Shashou discloses wherein the recognition unit includes a communication module (Fig. 1; system 100 includes software, processors, memory and communication; ¶0767-0773), and the auxiliary device (consumable cartridge/pod system 1600; Fig. 2) coupled through wired or wireless communication is recognized by using the communication module (¶0767-0773; 0790).
With regard to Claim 4, Day does not explicitly disclose wherein the recognition unit includes a sensing module including a sensor attached to the body, recognizes the auxiliary device by recognizing a recognition target object, which is attached to the auxiliary device and is recognizable by the sensor, by using the sensing module, and recognizes the auxiliary device, which includes the recognition target object recognized as another type, as another auxiliary device.
The secondary reference of Shashou discloses wherein the recognition unit includes a sensing module including a sensor attached to the body (¶0793, recognizes insertion of pod 1600 inserted into the enclosure), recognizes the auxiliary device by recognizing a recognition target object (¶0793, recognizes insertion of pod 1600 inserted into the enclosure), which is attached to the auxiliary device and is recognizable by the sensor (¶0793, recognizes insertion of pod 1600 inserted into the enclosure), by using the sensing module, and recognizes the auxiliary device, which includes the recognition target object recognized as another type, as another auxiliary device (¶0793, recognizes insertion of pod 1600 inserted into the enclosure; 0799-0804).
With regard to Claim 5, Day does not explicitly disclose wherein the sensor is at least one of a capacitive touch sensor, a hall sensor, or a photo sensor.
The secondary reference of Shashou discloses a sensing module for recognizing insertion of the pod 1660, however does not explicitly disclose wherein the sensor is at least one of a capacitance touch sensor, a hall sensor or a photo sensor. However, Shashou discloses the use of optical or capacitance sensing (¶2033) as a means of monitoring and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the types of sensors of Shashou, with the recognition unit of Shashou, in order to more accurately monitor the component, and since combining known features is a matter of design choice and yields predictable results.
With regard to Claim 7, Day further discloses wherein, when the recognition unit recognizes that the auxiliary device is coupled to the coupling unit (¶0039; Claims 6-10), however Day does not explicitly disclose wherein the control unit causes a terminal communicably connected to the print device to display an interface according to the individual function of the auxiliary device.
The secondary reference of Shashou discloses wherein the control unit causes a terminal communicably connected to the print device to display an interface according to the individual function of the auxiliary device (¶0780-0781).
With regard to Claim 8, Day discloses an operating method of a print device (¶0016; Figs. 1-3) including a body defining an appearance, a coupling unit disposed in the body to enable physical coupling to an auxiliary device, a recognition unit disposed in the body to recognize the auxiliary device and determine whether the coupling unit is coupled to the auxiliary device, and a control unit, the operating method comprising:
determining, by the recognition unit, whether the coupling unit is coupled to the auxiliary device by recognizing the auxiliary device; and
causing the control unit to set the print device to perform a basic function, which is printing, when the recognition unit recognizes that the auxiliary device is not coupled to the coupling unit, and
causing the control unit to set the auxiliary device coupled to the coupling unit to perform an individual function changed from the basic function when the recognition unit recognizes that the auxiliary device is coupled to the coupling unit.
The above claims are rejected for the same reasoning/rationale as Claim 1 above.
With regard to Claim 9, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 3 above; therefore claim 9 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 3.
With regard to Claim 10, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 4 above; therefore claim 10 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 4.
With regard to Claim 12, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 7 above; therefore claim 12 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 12.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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: The primary reasons for allowability for Claim 2 is that applicants claimed invention includes a print device having wherein the auxiliary device is at least one of a skin guide, a hair guide, a makeup guide, a multi-pass guide, or a camera accessory. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 6 is allowed because it depends from Claim 2.
Claim 11 is 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: The primary reasons for allowability for Claim 11 is that applicants claimed invention includes a print device having wherein the auxiliary device is at least one of a skin guide, a hair guide, a makeup guide, a multi- pass guide, or a camera accessory, and wherein the causing the control unit to set includes: causing the control unit to set a skin print function according to a preset skin print algorithm corresponding to the skin guide as the individual function when the recognition unit recognizes that the skin guide is coupled to the coupling unit in the determining: causing the control unit to set a hair print function according to a preset hair print algorithm corresponding to the hair guide as the individual function when the recognition unit recognizes that the hair guide is coupled to the coupling unit in the determining, causing the control unit to set a makeup print function according to a preset makeup print algorithm corresponding to the makeup guide as the individual function when the recognition unit recognizes that the makeup guide is coupled to the coupling unit in the determining, causing the control unit to set a multi-pass print function according to a preset multi-pass print algorithm corresponding to the multi-pass guide as the individual function when the recognition unit recognizes that the multi-pass guide is coupled to the coupling unit in the step of determining; and causing the control unit to set a camera image print function according to a preset camera image print algorithm corresponding to the camera accessory as the individual function when the recognition unit recognizes that the camera accessory is coupled to the coupling unit in the step of determining. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT A. RICHMOND whose telephone number is (313)446-6547. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6:00 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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SCOTT A RICHMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853