DETAILED ACTION
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) 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Ikeda et al (US Pub No 2013/0243471).
Regarding claim 1, Kawamata discloses an image forming apparatus comprising:
a transfer portion (53) configured to transfer a toner image to a sheet;
a fixing portion (72) configured to fix the toner image on the sheet, the toner image being transferred to the sheet by the transfer portion;
a sensor (90, [0041]) configured to sense the sheet on a downstream side of the transfer portion in a conveyance direction of the sheet and an upstream side of the fixing portion in the conveyance direction;
a duct (504) that extends from an air intake port (behind fan 300) to an air blowing port (640), the air intake port being open on an upper surface of the image forming apparatus, the air blowing port being open toward the sensor (airflow path shown by arrow K); and
an airflow generation portion (e.g. 300) configured to generate airflow that moves in the duct from the air intake port to the air blowing port.
It is noted that Kawamata fails to explicitly disclose the air intake being open upward on the upper surface. However, Ikeda discloses a similar air intake relating to the fixing device wherein the air intake is open upward on an upper surface (see disclosed first modification shown in figure 3, [0040]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Kawamata with the change in the intake direction to achieve the predictable result of achieving the same result with a different configuration via simple rearrangement (noted by Ikeda).
Regarding claim 2, Kawamata discloses a sheet discharge port (between rollers 90, 92, fig. 1) configured to discharge the sheet on which the fixing portion fixes the toner image, the sheet discharge port being open in a first direction above the fixing portion, the first direction being orthogonal to an up-down direction, wherein the transfer portion is provided below the fixing portion, and the sensor is provided on a second direction side than a conveyance path of the sheet, the conveyance path extending through the fixing portion, the second direction being opposite to the first direction (shown in figure 4).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamata, in view of Ikeda et al, further in view of Maeda et al (US Pat No 9,342,024).
Regarding claim 4, it is noted that Kawamata fails to explicitly disclose the sensor senses deflection of the sheet. However, Maeda discloses a similar device wherein a sensor (74) senses the deflection of a sheet having a toner image formed thereon. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device taught by *** with the teachings of Maeda to achieve the predictable result of providing a simple, low-cost replacement for determining curl (see C1, L 33-36).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5 and 6 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: None of the prior art on record discloses or suggests each and every feature of the applicant’s claimed invention. Specifically, the applicant’s claimed control is not taught or suggested, as well as the applicant’s additionally claimed structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Patrick Cicchino whose telephone number is (571)270-1954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM to 5PM.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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.
/Patrick Cicchino/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619