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) 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (2018/0236797) in view of Maud (2,376,161).
Regarding claim 1, Ohashi teaches a liquid ejecting apparatus comprising:
a movable body (fig. 10, item 8) including a head for ejecting a liquid ([0024]) or a maintenance section performing maintenance of the head;
a pair of rack and pinion mechanisms (fig. 10, items 503b/504, note that there is necessarily a pair, one on each side of the moveable body in the width direction) each including a rack (fig. 10, item 503b) and a drive gear (fig. 10, item 504) to move the movable body in a first direction (fig. 10, Z direction) in which the rack extends. Ohashi does not teach a switching mechanism.
Maud teaches a switching mechanism (Maud, fig. 1, all components shown), each switching mechanism being configured to switch presence and absence of meshing between the rack and the drive gear of each pair of rack and pinion mechanisms when the movable body is at an exchange position (Maud, cols. 1-2, lines 60-10),
each switching mechanism comprising:
a plug-in key (Maud, fig. 1, item D) provided on one of the rack and the drive gear (Maud, fig. 1, note rack B/E/D) of one of the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms, and a groove (Maud, fig. 1, note groove in pinion a) provided on another of the rack (Maud, fig. 1) and the drive gear of the one of the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms and is configured to mesh with the plug-in key (Maud, see fig. 1),
wherein, a phase of the plug-in key is the same as a of a tooth portion of the rack (Maud, see fig. 1) and a tooth portion of the drive gear (Maud, fig. 1), having a single fixed position in relation to the tooth portion of the rack or the tooth portion of the drive gear and a peak portion of the plug-in key matching a peak portion of the tooth portion of the rack or the tooth portion of the drive gear, and when viewed from an axial direction of the drive gear the plug-in key extends in the axial direction (Maud, fig. 1, Note that the plug-in key is in phase with tooth portions of both of the rack and pinion). 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 switching mechanism disclosed by Maud to the air of racks and pinions disclosed by Ohashi because doing so would allow for engaging of the racks with the pinions in a manner that ensure proper alignments.
Upon adding the switching mechanism of Maud to the racks and pinions of Ohashi, the resultant device would meet the limitation that the switching mechanism is provided for each rack and pinion mechanism of the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms.
Regarding claim 2, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when the movable body is attached, the meshing between the plug-in key and the groove of the switching mechanism is performed before the meshing between the rack and the drive gear (Maud, see fig. 3, note that the plug-in key is inserted into the groove before the teeth of the rack and drive gear are meshed), when the plug-in key and the groove of the switching mechanism mesh with each other, a
when the plug-in key and the groove of the switching mechanism do not mesh with each other, the
Regarding claim 3, Ohashi in view of Willliams teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein one of the plug-in key and the groove of the switching mechanism provided for each rack is provided at a position where the tooth portion of each rack of the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms mesh with each other in the same phase (Maud, see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the switching mechanism has a first portion (Maud, fig. 1, item a’) on the drive gear and a second portion on the rack (Maud, fig. 1), and the first portion has a cylindrical flange (Maud, fig. 1, not portion a’ is a cylindrical flange) that is concentric with the tooth portion of the drive gear (Maud, see fig. 1) and has an outer diameter larger than an outer diameter of the tooth portion of the drive gear, and the groove that is formed in the flange (Maud, see fig. 1, Note that the diameter of the “tooth portion” has not been defined. One could reasonably take a diameter of the circle formed by the ends of the teeth or the diameter formed by the circle from which the teeth extend. For purposes of rejection, the latter interpretation is being used).
Regarding claim 5, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the tooth portion provided on one of the drive gear and the rack comprises first teeth, and the plug-in key of each of the switching mechanisms has second teeth having a meshing length longer than a meshing length of the first teeth, and a meshing depth of the second teeth is longer than a meshing depth of the first teeth and the meshing is performed at a switching position (Maud, see fig. 1, Note that plug-in key E/D has a longer length than the other teeth of the switching mechanisms, and note that the plug-in key is inserted deeper into the teeth of the pinion than the other meshing teeth).
Regarding claim 6, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plug-in key of the switching mechanism is provided at a position different from the tooth portions of the rack and pinion mechanism in an axial direction of the drive gear (Maud, see fig. 1, Note teeth b and plug-in key D at different positions in the axial direction).
Regarding claim 7, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a length of the rack is longer than a length of one circumference of the drive gear (Ohashi, see fig. 10, Maud, fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8 Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms are provided on both sides in a width direction intersecting a moving direction of the movable body (Ohashi, see fig. 10, note that this is the case), and first teeth of the tooth portion of each of the rack and pinion mechanisms are provided on a movable body side with respect to second teeth of the plug-in key of the switching mechanism in the width direction of the movable body (Ohashi, fig. 10, Maud, fig. 1, Note that, upon combination of the references, the resultant device meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 9, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a first guide portion (Ohashi, fig. 10, portion of slot 501a intersecting rack direction) and a second guide portion (Ohashi, fig. 10, portion of slot 501a parallel to rack 503b) for guiding the movable body, wherein the first guide portion extends in a second direction (Ohashi, fig. 10, perpendicular to platen surface 9) that intersects the first direction in which each of the racks of the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms extend (Ohashi, see fig. 10), from the exchange position of the movable body, and the second guide portion extends in the first direction from the exchange position (Ohashi, fig. 10).
Regarding claim 10, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the switching mechanism is meshed by rotating the drive gear in a direction in which the movable body moves in a gravity direction (Ohashi, fig. 10, Maud, fig. 1, Note that, upon combination of the references, the resultant device meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 11, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the switching mechanism is meshed by rotating the drive gear in a direction in which the movable body moves in a gravity direction (Ohashi, fig. 10, Maud, fig. 1, Note that, upon combination of the references, the resultant device meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 12, Ohashi in view of Maud teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms include a first rack and pinion mechanism and a second rack and pinion mechanism (Ohashi, see fig. 10, note that there are two total assemblies), and the first rack and pinion mechanism and the second rack and pinion mechanism are provided on one end side and the other end side of the head in a third direction intersecting both of the first direction and a second direction that intersects the direction in which the racks of the pair of rack and pinion mechanisms extend (Ohashi, see fig. 10, Note that third direction in the width direction meets the limitation).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi in view of Maud as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Nakahata et al. (2020/0377323).
Regarding claim 13, Ohashi in view of Willliams teaches the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 11. Ohashi in view of Maud does not expressly teaches wherein the drive gear of the first rack and pinion mechanism, and the drive gear of the second rack and pinion mechanism are attached to a shaft extending in the third direction. Nakahata teaches this (Nakahata, see fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the two drive gears of the claimed switching mechanisms via a shaft so as to ensure that both drive gears stayed at the same positions relative to their corresponding pinions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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
