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 .
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a first reading section” in claim 1, and “a second reading section” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
“a first reading section” in claim 1 is read as the CIS 51a shown in Fig.4, and “ a second reading section” in claim 1 is read as the CIS 51b.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 9, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamakawa’314 (US 2013/0136314).
With respect to claim 1, Yamakawa’314 teaches an image forming system (Fig.1) comprising:
a first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) arranged on a conveyance path of a recording medium;
a second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b) arranged on the conveyance path at a position farther downstream than the first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) in a conveyance direction of the recording medium;
a first reading section (Fig.2, item 205a) arranged on the conveyance path between the first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) and the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b), and reads the recording medium conveyed through the conveyance path (paragraph 77); and
a second reading section (Fig.2, item 205c) arranged on the conveyance path at a position farther downstream than the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b) in the conveyance direction, and reads the recording medium conveyed through the conveyance path (paragraph 79).
With respect to claim 2, which further limits claim 1, Yamakawa’314 further comprising a hardware processor (Fig.3, item 210),
the hardware processor
causing the first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) to form an image on a first side of a recording medium and not to form an image on a second side opposite to the first side (paragraph 84); and
detecting an abnormality of the first image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section (Fig.2, item 111a) that reads the recording medium (Fig8, step S103) wherein
the first reading section reads the first side and the second side of the recording medium (paragraph 81).
With respect to claim 3, which further limits claim 2, Yamakawa’314 teaches wherein the hardware processor detects an abnormality of the first image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the first side (Fig.8, steps S103 and S111).
With respect to claim 4, which further limits claim 3, Yamakawa’314 does not teach wherein the hardware processor detects an abnormality of the first image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the second side [The first side P1 and the second side P2 of the sheet P can be scanned by selecting a scanner from the first inspection scanner 205a, the second inspection scanner 205b, and the third inspection scanner 205c (paragraph 81). Therefore, abnormality of the first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, items 111a) is considered being determined based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the first side].
With respect to claim 5, which further limits claim 2, Yamakawa’314 teaches wherein the hardware processor prohibits image formation by the second image forming apparatus on a recording medium on which an image has been formed by the first image forming apparatus from which an abnormality has been detected (Fig.8, steps S103 and S111).
With respect to claim 6, which further limits claim 2, Yamakawa’314 teaches wherein the hardware processor causes the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b) to form an image on the second side of a recording medium and not to form an image on the first side (Fig.8, step S108 and paragraph 135),
detects an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b) based on image data output by the second reading section (Fig.2, item 205c) that reads the recording medium (paragraph 160 and 161) and
the second reading section reads the first side and the second side of the recording medium (paragraph 81).
With respect to claim 8, which further limits claim 6, Yamakawa’314 teaches wherein the hardware processor detects an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus based on image data output by the second reading section that reads the second side of a recording medium (Fig.8, step S110).
With respect to claim 9, which further limits claim 8, Yamakawa’314 does not teach wherein the hardware processor detects an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus based on image data output by the second reading section that reads the first side of a recording medium [The first side P1 and the second side P2 of the sheet P can be scanned by selecting a scanner from the first inspection scanner 205a, the second inspection scanner 205b, and the third inspection scanner 205c (paragraph 81). Therefore, abnormality of the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, items 111b) is considered being determined based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the first side].
With respect to claim 12, Yamakawa’314 teaches an image forming method that is performed in an image forming system (Fig.1),
the image forming system (Fig.1) comprising:
first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) arranged on a conveyance path of a recording medium;
a second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b) arranged on the conveyance path at a position farther downstream than the first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) in a conveyance direction of the recording medium;
a first reading section (Fig.2, item 205a) arranged on the conveyance path between the first image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111a) and the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b), and reads the recording medium conveyed through the conveyance path (paragraph 77); and
a second reading section (Fig.2, item 205c) arranged on the conveyance path at a position farther downstream than the second image forming apparatus (Fig.2, item 111b) in the conveyance direction, and reads the recording medium conveyed through the conveyance path (paragraph 79), and
the image forming method including:
a device control step of causing the first image forming apparatus to form an image on a first side of the recording medium and not to form an image on a second side opposite to the first side (Fig.8, step S101), and causing the second image forming apparatus to form an image on the second side of the recording medium and not to form an image on the first side (Fig.8, step S108).
a first inspection step of detecting an abnormality of the first image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the first side; and
a second inspection step of detecting an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus based on image data output by the second reading section that reads the second side of the recording medium (Fig.8, step S109).
a first inspection step of detecting an abnormality of the first image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the first side and the second side of the recording medium (Fig.8, step S103 and paragraph 81); and
a second inspection step of detecting an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus based on image data output by the second reading section that reads the first side and the second side of the recording medium (Fig.8, step S110 and paragraph 81).
With respect to claim 13, it is a program claim which is being
analyzed and rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 12.
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamakawa’314 (US 2013/0136314), and further in view of Kaneko’342 (US 2013/0044342).
With respect to claim 7, which further limits claim 6, Yamakawa’314 does not teach wherein the hardware processor changes a criterion for detection of an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads a recording medium.
Kaneko’342 teaches that the master image generator updates the correction parameter with the calculated correction parameter, and corrects the pixel positions of the corrected master image using the calculated correction parameter to generate the re-corrected master image (paragraph 120).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yamakawa’314 according to the teaching of Kaneko’342 to obtain the calculated correction parameter based on image data output by the first reading section that reads a recording medium and to correct the pixel positions of the corrected master image using the calculated correction parameter to generate the re-corrected master image (wherein the hardware processor changes a criterion for detection of an abnormality of the second image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads a recording medium) because this will allow the printed sheet to be inspected more effectively.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamakawa’314 (US 2013/0136314), and further in view of Kato’236 (US 2003/0103236)
With respect to claim 10, which further limits claim 6, Yamakawa’314 does not teach wherein in a case in which an abnormality is detected in either one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus and an abnormality is not detected in another one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus, the hardware processor prohibits image formation by the one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus from which an abnormality has been detected and causes the another one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus to form images on both sides of a recording medium.
Kato’236 teaches that when the print processing for a job in the original designated printer is being determined not normally completed, other printer is being designated to continue to said the job (Fig.21, step S1308 and S1310, and paragraphs 178 and 179).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yamakawa’314 according to the teaching of Kato’236 to designate the first printer (Fig.2, item 111a in Yamakawa’314) to print both side of a paper for a double side printing job when the first printer (Fig.2, item 111a in Yamakawa’314) is being determined able to print normally and the second printer (Fig.2, item 111b in Yamakawa’314) is not able to print normally, and to designate the second printer (Fig.2, item 111b in Yamakawa’314) to print both side of a paper for a double side printing job when the second printer (Fig.2, item 111b in Yamakawa’314) is being determined able to print normally and the first printer (Fig.2, item 111a in Yamakawa’314) is not able to print normally (wherein in a case in which an abnormality is detected in either one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus and an abnormality is not detected in another one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus, the hardware processor prohibits image formation by the one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus from which an abnormality has been detected and causes the another one of the first image forming apparatus and the second image forming apparatus to form images on both sides of a recording medium) because this will allow the double side print job to be printed more effective.
With respect to claim 11, which further limits claim 10, Yamakawa’314 teaches wherein the hardware processor, in a case in which the second image forming apparatus forms images on both sides of a recording medium, detects an abnormality of the recording medium passing through the first image forming apparatus based on image data output by the first reading section that reads the recording medium, and in a case in which an abnormality of a recording medium is detected by the first inspector, prohibits image formation by the second image forming apparatus [As shown in Fig. 8, when the first face of a sheet printed by a first printer (Fig.2, item 111a) is being determined abnormally, the subsequent image forming process and image inspection process is being terminated (Fig.8, step S111). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize to prohibit the second printer (Fig.2, item 111b) to perform printing on both side of the sheet when the first face of a sheet printed by a first printer (Fig.2, item 111a) is being determined abnormally even the second printer (Fig.2, item 111b) is being designated to perform a double side printing job because this will allow the double side printing job to be printed with higher quality.].
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUO LONG CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3759. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am - 5pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tieu, Benny can be reached on (571) 272-7490. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/HUO LONG CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Prosecution Insights