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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on August 7, 2024 and November 19, 2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: element 24 in Fig. 1.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiramatsu et al. (US 2021/0291562 A1), hereinafter Hiramatsu.
Regarding claim 1, Hiramatsu teaches a recording apparatus comprising: a recording portion configured to apply a liquid composition to a recording medium and record an image (fig. 1; printing apparatus 3; ¶[0021]); a first air blowing portion having a plurality of first nozzle holes of which total cross-sectional area is a first total cross-sectional area, and configured to blow air toward the recording medium through the plurality of first nozzle holes (fig. 7; air-blow dryers 7a and 7b; ¶[0050], [0052]-[0053], [0057]); a second air blowing portion having a plurality of second nozzle holes of which total cross-sectional area is a second total cross-sectional area smaller than the first total cross-sectional area, and configured to blow air toward the recording medium through the plurality of second nozzle holes, and moreover provided within a same space as the first air blowing portion so as to be adjacent to the first air blowing portion on a downstream side in a conveyance direction of the recording medium (fig. 7; air-blow dryer 7c; ¶[0050], [0058]); and a control portion configured to control the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion such that a first air velocity in the plurality of first nozzle holes of the first air blowing portion is lower than a second air velocity in the plurality of second nozzle holes of the second air blowing portion, and a ratio of a first total air amount, which is a total air amount per unit time blown from the plurality of first nozzle holes, and a second total air amount, which is a total air amount per unit time blown from the plurality of second nozzle holes, is within a predetermined range (fig. 6; hot wind supply mechanism 9, upper-stage supplying unit 91u, middle-stage drying unit 91m; ¶[0068]-[0071]).
Regarding claim 14, Hiramatsu teaches a drying method for a recording apparatus that blows air toward a recording medium with the recording apparatus and dries the recording medium, the recording apparatus including a recording portion configured to apply a liquid composition to the recording medium and record an image (fig. 1; printing apparatus 3; ¶[0021]), a first air blowing portion having a plurality of first nozzle holes of which total cross-sectional area is a first total cross-sectional area and configured to blow air toward the recording medium through the plurality of first nozzle holes (fig. 7; air-blow dryers 7a and 7b; ¶[0050], [0052]-[0053], [0057]), and a second air blowing portion having a plurality of second nozzle holes of which total cross-sectional area is a second total cross-sectional area smaller than the first total cross-sectional area, and configured to blow air toward the recording medium through the plurality of second nozzle holes and moreover provided within a same space as the first air blowing portion so as to be adjacent to the first air blowing portion on a downstream side in a conveyance direction of the recording medium (fig. 7; air-blow dryer 7c; ¶[0050], [0058]), the method comprising: blowing air toward the recording medium from the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion such that a first air velocity in the plurality of first nozzle holes of the first air blowing portion is lower than a second air velocity in the plurality of second nozzle holes of the second air blowing portion, and a ratio of a first total air amount, which is a total air amount per unit time blown from the plurality of first nozzle holes, and a second total air amount, which is a total air amount per unit time blown from the plurality of second nozzle holes, is within a predetermined range (fig. 6; hot wind supply mechanism 9, upper-stage supplying unit 91u, middle-stage drying unit 91m; ¶[0068]-[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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiramatsu in view of Dollevoet et al. (US 2021/0146680 A1), hereinafter Dollevoet.
Regarding claim 8, Hiramatsu teaches the recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first air blowing portion is a first airflow duct provided with the plurality of first nozzle holes, and the second air blowing portion is a second airflow duct provided with the plurality of second nozzle holes ().
However, Hiramatsu fails to teach or fairly suggest wherein a distance in the conveyance direction between an outer covering of the first airflow duct and an outer covering of the second airflow duct is 50 mm or less.
Dollevoet teaches a web substrate drying apparatus comprising multiple drying units, wherein a distance in the conveyance direction between an outer covering of the first airflow duct and an outer covering of the second airflow duct is 50 mm or less (figs. 2-4; sub-heads 101A-C, sub-head MD length 142; ¶[0048]-[0049]). It is noted that Dollevoet teaches, in ¶[0049], the total length of the dryer to be equivalent to the combined length of the sub-head drying units, which suggests the subheads have no gaps between their housings.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the spacing between the air blowing units as taught by Dollevoet into the recording apparatus of Hiramatsu in order to improve the efficiency of drying of the printed medium.
Regarding claim 9, Hiramatsu teaches the recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first air blowing portion is a first airflow duct having an air blowing surface in which the plurality of first nozzle holes are provided, and the second air blowing portion is a second airflow duct having an air blowing surface in which the plurality of second nozzle holes are provided (fig. 7; air-blow dryers 7a, 7b, 7c, air blower chambers 72u; ¶[0052], [0058]).
However, Hiramatsu fails to teach or fairly suggest wherein a distance between the air blowing surface of the first airflow duct and the recording medium and a distance between the air blowing surface of the second airflow duct and the recording medium are 30 mm or less.
Dollevoet teaches a web substrate drying apparatus comprising multiple drying units wherein a distance between the air blowing surface of the first airflow duct and the recording medium and a distance between the air blowing surface of the second airflow duct and the recording medium are 30 mm or less (fig. 5; sub-head 101A, air handling pipe 102, head-conveyer spacing 131; ¶[0051]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the spacing between the air blowing surface and the recording medium as taught by Dollevoet into the recording apparatus of Hiramatsu in order to improve the efficiency of drying of the printed medium.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiramatsu in view of Ramackers et al. (US 2017/0261895 A1), hereinafter Ramackers.
Regarding claim 10, Hiramatsu teaches the recording apparatus according to claim 1, however Hiramatsu fails to teach or fairly suggest wherein X = RL × A, and the A satisfies 0.8 ≤ A ≤ 1.3, where RL is a first nozzle hole diameter of the plurality of first nozzle holes, and X is a pitch of the plurality of first nozzle holes of the first air blowing portion in a width direction orthogonal to the conveyance direction.
Ramackers teaches an air impingement system comprising a nozzle grid wherein X = RL × A, and the A satisfies 0.8 ≤ A ≤ 1.3, where RL is a first nozzle hole diameter of the plurality of first nozzle holes, and X is a pitch of the plurality of first nozzle holes of the first air blowing portion in a width direction orthogonal to the conveyance direction (figs. 4A; d-row, dstitch, doutlet; ¶[0028]-[0029], [0070]). It is noted that Ramackers teaches in ¶[0028]-[0029] embodiments wherein the nozzle diameter is between 0.5 mm and 6 mm, the spacing in the conveyance direction, dstitch, is between 2mm and 50mm, and, in ¶[0070], the pitch in a direction perpendicular to the conveyance direction, drow, is half the value of dstitch. Thus, the taught ranges and mathematical relationships of these values in Ramackers overlap the values of the RL and X as claimed in the mathematical relationship of the instant claim.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the nozzle arrangement of Ramackers into the recording apparatus of Hiramatsu in order to improve the efficiency of drying and to minimize the effect of causing a lifting of the edge of a transported sheet due to air contact during drying.
Regarding claim 11, Hiramatsu as modified by Ramackers teaches the recording apparatus according to claim 10. Ramackers further teaches a disposition spacing of the plurality of nozzle holes in the conveyance direction and a disposition spacing of the plurality of second nozzle holes in the width direction are constant (fig. 4A; d-row, dstitch, doutlet; ¶[0069]-[0070]).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiramatsu in view of Leighton et al. (US 2022/0402278 A1), hereinafter Leighton.
Regarding claim 12, Hiramatsu teaches the recording apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to teach or fairly suggest an air circulation portion configured to collect air of a space in which the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion are provided, and supply the air toward the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion.
However, Leighton teaches a drying device for a printed substrate comprising an air circulation portion configured to collect air of a space in which the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion are provided, and supply the air toward the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion (fig. 2; duct 160; ¶[0029], [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the recirculation system of Leighton into the recording apparatus of Hiramatsu in order to improve the consistency of the conditioning of the blown air.
Regarding claim 13, Leighton further teaches the air circulation portion includes a heater configured to heat the air to be supplied to the first air blowing portion and a heater configured to heat the air to be supplied to the second air blowing portion (fig. 2; heater 150; ¶[0029], [0033]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7 and 15 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:
Regarding dependent claim 2, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the recording apparatus of the claim, particularly including and in combination with, wherein 1.2DH ≤ DL ≤ 3.0DH is satisfied, where DL is the first total cross-sectional area and DH is the second total cross-sectional area, and wherein the control portion controls the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion so as to satisfy 1.2VL ≤ VH ≤ 3.0VL and FH:FL = 2:3 to 3:2, where VL is the first air velocity, VH is the second air velocity, FL is the first total air amount, and FH is the second total air amount.
Regarding dependent claim 15, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the method of the claim, particularly including and in combination with, wherein 1.2DH ≤ DL ≤ 3.0DH is satisfied, where DL is the first total cross-sectional area and DH is the second total cross-sectional area, and wherein the method includes blowing air toward the recording medium from the first air blowing portion and the second air blowing portion so as to satisfy 1.2VL ≤ VH ≤ 3.0VL and FH:FL = 2:3 to 3:2, where VL is the first air velocity, VH is the second air velocity, FL is the first total air amount, and FH the second total air amount.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hara et al. (US 2010/0103237 A1) teaches a medium drying device comprising a plurality of dryers wherein air velocity is tunable by adjusting the shape of a movable baffle. Funada (JP 2022069114 A) teaches a medium drying device comprising nozzle plates separated by air recycling sections. Maida (US 2022/0402278 A1) teaches a medium drying device comprising a heater and recycling system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS RAY KNIEF whose telephone number is (703)756-5733. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM - 5 PM EST.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 5712722149. 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.
/TRK/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853