DETAILED ACTION
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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.
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) 1-4, 6, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiwata et al. (2013/0194367) in view of Harayama et al. (9,770,928) and Mima (2022/0161574).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Chiwata teaches a medium heating apparatus configured to heat a medium on which liquid was ejected, the heat medium heating apparatus comprising:
a conveyance unit (fig. 1, note conveyance path with a number of components comprising a conveyance unit) configured to convey the medium in a gravity direction (see fig. 1, note that there are a number of points in the conveyance path where the medium is conveyed in the gravity direction);
a recording unit (see fig. 1) configured to record an image on a medium by ejecting liquid on the medium;
a heating unit (fig. 6, item 106) configured to heat the medium (fig. 4, item D) conveyed in the gravity direction by the conveyance unit (see fig. 1, note that the claim does not require heating while the medium is conveyed in the gravity direction);
a control unit ([0046]) configured to control the heating unit;
a main frame (fig. 5, item 100) configured to house the control unit;
a sub frame (fig. 5, item 94) attached to the main frame; and
an air blower (fig. 5, item 94A), wherein
the heating unit includes:
a heat source (fig. 5, item 106) configured to generate heat, and
a jetting unit (fig. 5, item 104) configured to jet air to the medium such that the air flows to a lower side along the medium (see fig. 5),
the heating unit and the main frame are arranged in a first direction (fig. 6, direction W2, note that top of item 100 is directly above heating unit 106/96), the main frame and the sub frame are arranged in a second direction (fig. 5, L direction) different from the first direction,
an intake port (fig. 5, opening in item 100 closest to item 94) is open at the main frame,
a ventilation port (fig. 5, opening in item 94 closet to intake port) in communication with the intake port and an air drawing port (fig. 5, opening in item 94 farthest from intake port) in communication with outside of the sub frame are open at the sub frame (see fig. 5),
the blower is attached to at least one of the main frame and the sub frame (see fig. 5),
the blower blows air into the main frame through the intake port, the ventilation port, and the air drawing port (see fig. 5), and
the air drawing port is located at a position not overlapping the heating unit in the second direction (see fig. 5).
Chiwata does not teach wherein the jetting unit jets air such that air flows downward in the gravity direction, wherein the first direction intersects the gravity direction, second direction intersects the gravity direction and the first direction,
Chiwata also does not teach wherein the medium is conveyed so as to pass between the case and the main frame or a case configured to house the heat source and the jetting unit, the case is provided as a separate body from the main frame.
Harayama teaches a conveyance path in substantially a gravity direction with heaters on both sides of the conveyance path so the medium is conveyed between the heaters in the substantially gravity direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange two heaters on each side of a conveyance path, as disclosed by Harayama, in the device disclosed by Chiwata because doing so would amount to a simple rearrangement of a direction of the conveyance path while also allowing for more precise and thorough heating of the medium after printing.
Upon combination, two of Chiwata’s drying devices would be positioned across from each other in a direction intersecting the gravity direction, and the medium would be conveyed between them. Further, duct 100 of Chiwata would constitute the main frame of one dryer and the case of another. Further, the jetting units of the driers would blow directly toward the medium with some of the air deflecting and traveling downward in the gravity direction.
Chiwata in view of Harayama does not expressly disclose where its control unit is disposed. Mima teaches wherein a control unit is located in an air flow path of an irradiation unit (Mima, see fig. 1, Note fan 4 cools control unit 10/11 of the irradiation device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the controller of Chiwata in view of Harayama in its air flow path, as disclosed by Mima, because doing so would allow for cooling of the drive circuit while operating the dryer. That is, because driver IC’s were used for almost all printer components at the time of invention and were subject to overheating, it would have been obvious to position the driver IC’s of a dryer unit so as to receive residual cooling airflow in the manner disclosed by Mima.
Examiner acknowledges Mima is not directed to a dryer but an irradiating element. Nonetheless, Examiner maintains it would have been obvious to position such control elements in a blowing/suction path of any fan so as to cool the control unit.
Upon combination, the driver IC would be positioned in the drying unit with the main frame, and the positioning limitations for the driver IC would be met.
Regarding claim 2, Chiwata in view of Harayama and Mima teaches the medium heating apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the sub frame does not overlap the heating unit in the second direction (Chiwata, see fig. 5).
Regarding claim 3, Chiwata in view of Harayama and Mima teaches the medium heating apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the blower is located at the intake port (Chiwata, see fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, Chiwata in view of Harayama and Mima teaches the medium heating apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the heating unit is located on a front side of the main frame, and the air drawing port is open at a front surface of the sub frame (Chiwata, see fig. 5, Note that the claimed “front side” and “front surface” have not been defined in any way).
Regarding claim 6, Chiwata in view of Harayama and Mima teaches the medium heating apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a partition member (Chiwata, fig. 6, item 110) configured to partition a region into a region located on a lower side of the main frame and a region located on a lower side of the sub frame as viewed from the first direction (Chiwata, see fig. 5, Note that the claimed “lower side” and “regions” have not been defined with any specificity).
Regarding claim 9, Chiwata in view of Harayama and Mima teaches the medium heating apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a heat shielding member (Chiwata, fig. 6, item 110) disposed between the heating unit and the main frame and configured to shield head from the heating unit to the main frame (Chiwata, fig. 6, Note that heat shielding member 110 helps shield heat from heating unit 106 from reaching the main frame 100).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 7 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 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 571-202-5960. 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
Prosecution Insights