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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-5 and 8-11 in the reply filed on 01/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/27/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a first set of plurality of nozzle rows” and “a second set of plurality of nozzle rows” in lines 9 and 11, respectively. Claims must particularly point out and distinctly define the metes and bounds of the subject matter. A claim is indefinite if the scope of the claim is not clear to a hypothetical person possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art. One cannot ascertain whether “plurality of nozzle rows” recited in lines 9 and 11 are the same as or different than “the plurality of nozzle rows” previously recited in claim 1. Claims 2-5 and 8-11 which depend from claim 1 are similarly rejected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsukahara (US 2019/0016056 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tsukahara teaches a shaping device that shapes a stereoscopic three-dimensional object by discharging ink, and includes a plurality of inkjet heads 160 (see FIG. 2, FIG. 6B) that eject ink of a color different from each other (shaping device that shapes a shaped object, in which at least a part is colored, by overlapping layers of ink) (Fig 1, 2, 6B and ¶0057). The inkjet heads 160 (a plurality of head units) are held by a carriage 70 (a carriage that holds the plurality of head units) (see FIG. 2), and is scanned to carry out shaping (¶0057).
Tsukahara teaches that the carriage 70 holds the inkjet head 160 (¶0085). The carriage 70 is arranged with the first sub-tank 162, to which the first flow path 156 is connected, the inkjet heads 160 including a nozzle (see FIG. 6B) for discharging ink, the second sub-tank 164 arranged downstream of the inkjet heads 160, and the second flow path 170 for circulating the ink from the second sub-tank 164 to the three-way valve 140 (a plurality of head units, each of the plurality of head units eject ink from a plurality of nozzle rows; each of the plurality of head units include the plurality of nozzle rows, each of the plurality of nozzle rows eject ink supplied from an ink container via different ink supply paths) (Fig 6B and ¶0085).
Tsukahara teaches a plurality of sub-tanks in the carriage 70 and a plurality of nozzles connected thereto in the shaping device 1 (Fig 6B and ¶0093). The carriage 70 includes, for example, eight inkjet heads 160 corresponding to the ink of each color (Fig 6B and ¶0093). FIG. 6B shows an inkjet head 160A that ejects the first ink, and an inkjet head 160B that ejects the second ink; wherein inkjet head 160A includes a first nozzle row 202A that ejects the first ink and a second nozzle row 204A, and is connected to a first sub-tank 162A and a second sub-tank 164A, where the ink moves from the first sub-tank 162A to the second sub-tank 164B; wherein inkjet head 160B ejects the second ink, but has a configuration similar to the inkjet head 160A (the plurality of head units comprises a first head unit including a first set of plurality of nozzle rows and a second head unit including a second set of plurality of nozzle rows (Fig 6B and ¶0093-0094).
Tsukahara teaches the plurality of head units comprises a first head unit including a first set of plurality of nozzle rows and a second head unit including a second set of plurality of nozzle rows. However, the limitations “ejects colored ink of different colors” and “ejects ink different from the colored ink ejected by the first head unit” recite the inclusion of a material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed and do not impart patentability to the claims. MPEP 2115.
Regarding claim 2, as applied to claim 1, Tsukahara a shaping device comprising further that in each head unit, the plurality of nozzle rows are arranged while maintaining a predetermined positional relationship (Fig 6B and ¶0093-0094).
The limitation “each of the plurality of head units is a component of a unit of replacement to be collectively replaced when any one of the nozzle rows fails” is a recitation of intended use of the claimed plurality of head units. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP 2114(II). Here, Tsukahara teaches an apparatus which includes all the structural limitations of the claim, specifically a plurality of head units.
Regarding claims 3 and 8, as applied to claims 1 and 2, the limitations “the shaped object is shaped which includes: a light reflecting region formed using an ink of a light reflective color; and a coloring region formed on an outer side of the light reflecting region using the colored ink, the coloring region is a region formed using the colored inks of a plurality of colors and a clear ink” recite the inclusion of a material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed and do not impart patentability to the claims. MPEP 2115.
The limitation “each of the plurality of nozzle rows in the first head unit ejects each of the colored inks of the plurality of colors used for forming the coloring region, and the second head unit includes, as at least a part of the plurality of nozzle rows: a nozzle row that ejects the light reflective ink; a nozzle row that ejects the clear ink; and a nozzle row that ejects ink to become a material of a support layer that supports at least a part of the shaped object when shaping the shaped object” is a recitation of intended use of the claimed plurality of head units. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP 2114(II). Here, Tsukahara teaches an apparatus which includes all the structural limitations of the claim, specifically a plurality of head units comprising a first head unit and a second head unit.
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 3, the limitations “wherein the coloring region is a region formed only with the colored ink of the plurality of colors ejected from the first head unit and the clear ink ejected from the second head unit” recite the inclusion of a material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed and do not impart patentability to the claims. MPEP 2115.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 5 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukahara (US 2019/0016056 A1), as applied to claims 1, 2, 3, and 4, and in further view Hakkaku (US 2016/0082654 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 9-11, as applied to claims 1, 2, 3, and 4, Tsukahara does not teach a main scan drive unit that causes the plurality of head units to perform a main scanning operation of ejecting ink while moving in a main scanning direction set in advance; and a flattening means that includes a flattening roller that flattens a layer of the ink, wherein the main scan drive unit includes: a guide member that guides movement of the carriage in the main scanning direction; and a drive mechanism that moves the carriage along the guide member, and the flattening means is held by the guide member so as to be movable in the main scanning direction outside the carriage.
However, in the same field of endeavor, modeling apparatus, Hakkaku teaches the known technology of a modeling apparatus comprising a main scan drive unit that causes the plurality of head units to perform a main scanning operation of ejecting ink while moving in a main scanning direction set in advance (main scanning drive unit 14); and a flattening means that includes a flattening roller that flattens a layer of the ink (flattening roller 222), wherein the main scan drive unit includes: a guide member that guides movement of the carriage in the main scanning direction (guide rail 104); and a drive mechanism that moves the carriage along the guide member (control unit 18), and the flattening means is held by the guide member so as to be movable in the main scanning direction outside the carriage (¶0036,0040-0045).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the device disclosed in Tsukahara by applying the known technique of a main scan drive unit that causes the plurality of head units to perform a main scanning operation of ejecting ink while moving in a main scanning direction set in advance; and a flattening means that includes a flattening roller that flattens a layer of the ink, wherein the main scan drive unit includes: a guide member that guides movement of the carriage in the main scanning direction; and a drive mechanism that moves the carriage along the guide member, and the flattening means is held by the guide member so as to be movable in the main scanning direction outside the carriage as disclosed in Hakkaku to the shaping device disclosed in Tsukahara with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Koda (US 2014/0009544 A1) teaches an apparatus wherein the carriage 233 mounts liquid ejection heads 234a and 234b (collectively referred to as "liquid ejection heads 234" unless distinguished) serving as recording heads for ejecting ink droplets of different colors, e.g., yellow (Y), cyan (C), magenta (M), and black (K) (¶0078).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JaMel M Nelson whose telephone number is (571)272-8174. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..
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, Galen Hauth can be reached on (571) 270-5516. 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.
/JAMEL M NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743