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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/16/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-7 are 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 7:
These claims require the liquid ejection apparatus to include “a liquid ejection unit including a glue belt, … a first nozzle group, … and a second nozzle group” and “a movement mechanism configured to reciprocate the liquid ejection unit.”
It is Examiner’s best understanding that the claimed “liquid ejection unit” corresponds to the disclosed liquid ejection unit 16 having the various nozzle groups, that the claimed “glue belt” corresponds to the disclosed glue belt 17, and that the claimed “movement mechanism” corresponds to the disclosed movement mechanism 15. According to Applicant’s disclosure, the movement mechanism 15 reciprocates the liquid ejection unit 16 in first and second directions D1-D2 (per paragraph 50 of original written description). Examiner was unable to find a teaching or suggestion in which the movement mechanism 15 also reciprocated glue belt 17.
It is not clear, then, how the claimed structure corresponds to the underlying disclosure. Specifically, if the claimed liquid ejection unit includes the glue belt (as claimed), then it is not clear how the claimed “movement mechanism” corresponds to Applicant’s disclosure, since the disclosed movement mechanism does not also reciprocate the glue belt.
Regarding claims 2-6:
These claims fail to remedy the deficiencies of claim 1, and therefore also fail to meet the requirements of this statute.
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) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiramoto et al. (US 2021/0129538 A1) in view of Tamai et al. (US 2024/0253355 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 7 (as best understood):
Hiramoto et al. disclose a liquid ejection apparatus comprising:
a glue belt (transport belt 24) including a conveyance surface that is configured to convey a cloth and to which an adhesive is applied (paragraphs 21, 26);
a liquid ejection unit (liquid ejecting portion 16) including a first nozzle group (a nozzle row 69) configured to eject a first liquid to cloth conveyed by the glue belt (paragraph 34), and a second nozzle group (another nozzle row 69) configured to eject a second liquid (paragraphs 47-48);
a movement mechanism (19) configured to reciprocate the liquid ejection unit in a first direction and a second direction opposite to the first direction (paragraphs 32-34 & Figs. 1, 3); and
a second liquid receiving unit (at least one of flushing trays 71-72) configured to receive the second liquid discharged as a waste liquid from the liquid ejection unit reciprocated by the movement mechanism (paragraph 50 & Fig. 3); and
a cleaning unit (33) configured to clean at least a part of the glue belt (paragraph 29-30),
wherein the first liquid is different from the second liquid (paragraphs 38, 47-48, 116),
wherein the first nozzle group is configured to eject the first liquid to the glue belt as a waste (paragraph 52 & Fig. 12), and
wherein the second nozzle group is configured to eject the second liquid to the second liquid receiving unit as a waste (paragraph 52 & Fig. 14).
Hiramoto et al. do not expressly disclose that the second liquid contains a softening agent.
However, Hiramoto et al. do also disclose ejecting different types of liquids (paragraphs 38, 47-48, 116).
Further, Tamai et al. disclose a liquid ejecting apparatus that is able to suppress reaction of liquids (paragraph 153) while enhancing aggregation, fixability, and fastness of a printed image (paragraphs 56-57) by comprising a liquid ejection unit including a first nozzle group (of ink heads 4) and a second nozzle group (of post-processing liquid heads 6), wherein the second nozzle group is configured to eject a second liquid containing a softening agent (“silicon-based processing liquid”: paragraph 57-58),
wherein the second liquid is ejected to a softening agent receiving unit (post-processing liquid container 79) as a waste (paragraph 150 & Fig. 20).
Therefore, at the time of filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Hiramoto et al.’s apparatus to include various nozzle groups for ejecting pre-post processing liquids, as taught by Tamai et al.
Regarding claim 2:
Hiramoto et al.’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 1, and Hiramoto et al. also disclose that the liquid ejection unit further includes a third nozzle group (another nozzle group 69) configured to eject a third liquid (paragraphs 47-48); and
Tamai et al. also disclose that the liquid ejection unit further includes a third nozzle group (of pre-processing liquid head 5) configured to eject a third liquid (“pre-processing liquid”), the third liquid containing an aggregating agent including a component of aggregating the first liquid (paragraph 56).
Regarding claim 3:
Hiramoto et al.’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 2, and Tamai et al. also disclose an aggregating agent receiving unit (pre-processing liquid container 72) configured to receive the third liquid discharged as a waste liquid from the liquid ejection unit reciprocated by a movement mechanism (paragraphs 150-151 & Fig. 20), wherein the third nozzle group is configured to eject the third liquid to the aggregating agent receiving unit as a waste (paragraphs 150-151).
Regarding claim 4:
Hiramoto et al.’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 2, and Tamai et al. also disclose that the second nozzle group is disposed downstream of the first nozzle group and the third nozzle group in a conveyance direction (F) of cloth conveyed by a belt (Figs. 1, 3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Watanabe (US 2011/0261096 A1) disclose a conveyance belt (8) having separate pre-treatment liquid ejection (8y2) and an ink ejection areas (8y1) for receiving flushing.
Hioki (US 2022/0349122 A1) disclose a liquid ejection apparatus comprising a pretreatment head (1), a post-treatment head (3), and recording heads (2), wherein a treatment liquid comprises a silicone oil that acts as a softener (paragraphs 37-40).
Communication with the USTPO
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