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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). However, the attempt to electronically retrieve the certified copy of priority document(s) on 8/23/24 failed. The requirements 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) are not met.
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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuoka et al. (U.S. 2020/0256752 A1) in view of Sasaki (U.S. 2016/0159111 A1).
Fukuoka et al. disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a medium heating apparatus (§§0257- 0267 and Fig. 11) comprising:
a heating unit (410, §§0260- 0261 and Fig. 11) configured to heat a medium on which liquid was ejected;
a winding unit configured to wind the medium heated by the heating unit (3B, §§0040, 0060-0061 and Figs. 10-11; please note that the composition of the conveyor 5, and particularly the number of rollers 17 and 19, is disclosed to be flexible among embodiments, §§0060-0067); and
a guide bar (19C, §§0061-0067 and Fig. 10; please note that the composition of the conveyor 5, and particularly the number of rollers 17 and 19, is disclosed to be flexible among embodiments, §§0060-0067) around which the medium is wound between the heating unit and the winding unit, the guide bar being configured to guide the medium to the winding unit, wherein
the heating unit includes:
a radiant heat source (455A, §§0260-0261 and Fig. 11) configured to emit radiant heat onto an ejected, and
a jetting unit (455A, §§0260-0261 and Fig. 11) configured to jet air to the surface of the medium on which liquid was ejected, and
the guide bar is configured to make contact with the surface of the medium on which liquid was ejected, and configured to be rotatable (§§0061-0067).
Regarding Claim 2, a driving unit configured to rotate the guide bar (§0061); and
a control unit (15, 37, §§0077, 0126-0132 and Fig. 4) configured to control the driving unit based on an amount of liquid ejected to the medium.
Fukuoka et al. do not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a jetting unit configured to flow air around the radiant heat source by jetting air to the ejected surface of the medium at an upstream side of radiant heat source in a transport direction, and by drawing air from the ejected surface of the medium at a downstream side of the radiant heat source in the transport direction.
Sasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a jetting unit (17, §§0041-0057 and Fig. 2) configured to flow air around the radiant heat (46, 47, §0044 and Fig. 2) source by jetting air to the ejected surface of the medium at an upstream side of radiant heat source in a transport direction, and by drawing air from the ejected surface of the medium at a downstream side of the radiant heat source in the transport direction. Please note that the direction of gas transport from the blowing section 45 pressure increasing section 42 along the medium P (lower-left-to-upper-right in Fig. 2) reads on the limitation “a transport direction”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the recirculation of Sasaki to the medium heating apparatus of Fukuoka et al. to reduce the intake of ambient air and hence the contamination of drying images with dust which said ambient air may contain.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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: the primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 3-4 is the inclusion of the limitations of a medium heating apparatus including a cover member configured to cover the guide bar, wherein the cover member is configured to move along the guide bar. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination of that has not been found, taught or suggested by prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Similarly, the primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 5 is the inclusion of the limitations of a medium heating apparatus including an absorbing roller configured to absorb liquid by making contact with the guide bar. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination of that has not been found, taught or suggested by prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Claims 7-14 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the allowance: the primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 7-10 is the inclusion of the limitations of a medium heating apparatus including a cover member configured to cover the guide bar, wherein the cover member is configured to move along the guide bar. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination of that has not been found, taught or suggested by prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Similarly, the primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 11-14 is the inclusion of the limitations of a medium heating apparatus including an absorbing roller configured to absorb liquid by making contact with the guide bar. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination of that has not been found, taught or suggested by prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed 3/16/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2 and 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection of Claims 1-2 is made in view of Sasaki (U.S. 2016/0159111 A1).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV whose telephone number is (571)270-7049. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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 Rodrigues 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.
/ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/JASON S UHLENHAKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853