DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the embodiments according to Figures 9 and 13 in the reply filed on 1/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the liquid tank” and “the pressure decreased liquid tank” lack antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the liquid tank which is not decreased in pressure” and “the other liquid tank which is decreased in pressure” lack antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the inflow port” lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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 one or more liquid tanks and then recites “the liquid tank” and “the pressure decreased liquid tank” However, if the one or more liquid tanks is, in fact, more than one liquid tank, to then recite “the liquid tank” is indefinite because it is not clear as to which of the more than one liquid tanks the liquid tank is intended to refer. Correction is required.
Because all other claims depend from claim 1, they are also rejected on this basis.
Claim 2 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 clear as to which of the plurality of liquid tanks “the liquid tank which is not decreased in pressure” and “the other tank which is decreased in pressure” are intended to refer. Correction is required.
Claim 4 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 plurality of inflow passes but then recites “the inflow pass,” and it is unclear as to which of the plurality of inflow passes the inflow pass is intended to refer. Correction is required.
Because claims 5-8 depend from claim 4, they are also rejected on this basis.
Claim 10 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 “the inflow port,” but claim 8, from which claim 10 depends, recites a plurality of inflow ports, and thus it is unclear as to which of the plurality of inflow ports the inflow port is intended to refer. Correction is required.
Note that there are plurality issues in almost all of the claims. The best prior art has been cited in light of these issues.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yokota et al. (2010/0085396).
Regarding claim 1, Yokota teaches a degassing device which removes air dissolved in a liquid under a pressure decreased atmosphere, the degassing device comprising:
one or more liquid tanks (fig. 7, items 120, 130) in which the liquid is stored (see fig. 7);
a pressure decreasing device (fig. 7, item 152, operated in reverse, [0105]) which decreases pressure in the liquid tank ([0125], note that, when operated in reverse, pump 152 lowers the pressure in tank 130); and
an inflow pass (fig. 7, item 180) which allows the liquid to be flowed into the liquid tank due to a negative pressure in the pressure decreased liquid tank ([0125], note when pump decreases pressure in tank 130 and valve 182 is open, liquid from tank 120 flows into tank 130).
Regarding claim 2, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 1, comprising: a plurality of the liquid tanks (fig. 7, items 120, 130), wherein the pressure decreasing device communicates with at least one of the liquid tanks (see fig. 7, tank 130), and the inflow pass allows the liquid to be flowed from the liquid tank which is not decreased in pressure into the other liquid tank which is decreased in pressure by the pressure decreasing device ([0125], note when pump decreases pressure in tank 130 and valve 182 is open, liquid from tank 120 flows into tank 130).
Regarding claim 3, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 1, comprising: a plurality of the liquid tanks, wherein the inflow pass allows any two or more of the liquid tanks to be communicated with each other (see fig. 7, note that tanks 120, 130 communicate through inflow pass 180).
Regarding claim 4, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 1, comprising: a plurality of the liquid tanks (fig. 7, items 120, 130); a plurality of the inflow passes (fig. 7, portions of 180 inserted into each tank), the inflow pass allowing any two or more of the liquid tanks to be communicated with each other (see fig. 7); and a control device (fig. 6, item 10) which controls the pressure decreasing device and the inflow passes, wherein the control device controls the pressure decreasing device such that a pressure of any one of the liquid tanks is decreased and controls the inflow passes such that the liquid is flowed from the liquid tank which is not decreased in pressure into the other liquid tank which is decreased in pressure by the pressure decreasing device ([0125], note when pump decreases pressure in tank 130 and valve 182 is open, liquid from tank 120 flows into tank 130, and vice versa).
Regarding claim 5, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 4, comprising: three or more of the liquid tanks (fig. 7, items 120, 130, 102); wherein the control device controls the pressure decreasing device such that a pressure of any one of the liquid tanks is decreased and controls the inflow passes such that the liquid is flowed from the liquid tank which is not decreased in pressure into the other liquid tank which is decreased in pressure by the pressure decreasing device ([0125], note when pump decreases pressure in tank 130 and valve 182 is open, liquid from tank 120 flows into tank 130, and vice versa).
Regarding claim 6, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 5, wherein the control device controls the pressure decreasing device to flow the liquid into the liquid tank which is decreased in pressure and then to maintain a pressure decreased state of the liquid tank which is decreased in pressure ([0125], note when pump decreases pressure in tank 130 and valve 182 is open, liquid from tank 120 flows into tank 130, and vice versa).
Regarding claim 7, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 5, wherein the control device controls such that approximately all amount of the liquid stored in the liquid tank which is not decreased in pressure is flowed into the other liquid tank which is decreased in pressure by controlling the pressure decreasing device ([0125], note when pump decreases pressure in tank 130 and valve 182 is open, liquid from tank 120 flows into tank 130, and note that any amount of liquid can be transferred from the tank without reduced pressure to the tank with reduced pressure).
Regarding claim 12, Yokota teaches an inkjet recording apparatus comprising: the degassing device according to claim 1; and a recording head (fig. 7, item 50) which ejects the liquid degassed by the degassing device to a sheet ([0071]).
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) 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokota in view of Norikane et al. (2013/0010035).
Regarding claim 8, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 1. Yokota teaches not wherein the inflow pass includes a plurality of inflow ports through which the liquid is flowed into the liquid tank. Norikane teaches a shower-head like inflow pass to supply a liquid from one tank to another (Norikane, see fig. 13, Note more than 25 inflow ports showering liquid into a receiving tank 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an inflow pass of the type disclosed by Norikane in the device disclosed by Yokota because doing so would allow for proper mixing and dispersion of solids within the liquid upon movement from one tank to another.
Regarding claim 9, Yokota in view of Norikane teaches the degassing device according to claim 8, wherein the inflow ports allow the liquid to be flowed in in a form of shower (Norikane, see fig. 13).
Regarding claim 10, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 9, wherein an opening diameter of the inflow port is 0.8 mm or less (Norikane, see fig. 13).
Regarding claim 11, Yokota teaches the degassing device according to claim 8, wherein a number of the inflow ports is 25 or more (Norikane, see fig. 13).
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, RICARDO MAGALLANES can be reached at 571-272-5960. 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