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
Foreign priority papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or 35 U.S.C. § 365(a)-(c) are acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) submitted by applicant on 04/23/2024, 02/19/2025, 07/31/2025 and 01/09/2026 has/have been considered. The submission(s) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.97.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 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 of this title, 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.
1. Claim(s) 1-3 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20140354743 to Tsuchiya (hereinafter “Tsuchiya”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20140152734 to Endo et al. (hereinafter “Endo”).
With respect to claim 1, Tsuchiya discloses a printing device (1 FIG. 1) comprising: a head that ejects an ink that cures by being irradiated with a light, toward a mounting face on which a medium is mounted (15 FIG. 2); a light irradiation device that is arranged side by side with the head and irradiates the mounting face with a light that cures an ink from a light-emission area disposed on an irradiation face facing the mounting face (20/25 FIG. 3 and FIG. 5); and an part arranged in at least a part of a facing portion facing the mounting face between the light-emission area and the head (41 FIG. 5).
However, Tsuchiya fails to specifically disclose:
electrostatic flocking.
Endo discloses:
electrostatic flocking (56 FIG. 6 [0052]).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the electrostatic flocking as disclosed by Endo with the method/apparatus of Tsuchiya. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve the light absorption and reduce the light reflection ([0052] of Endo).
With respect to claim 2, Tsuchiya in view of Endo discloses wherein the electrostatic flocking part is provided over an entire area of the head side of the light- emission area of the irradiation face (41 FIG. 5 and 11 of Tsuchiya and 56 FIG. 6 [0052]).
With respect to claim 3, Tsuchiya in view of Endo discloses wherein the irradiation face has a planar shape, and disposed inclined so as to have an end portion on the head side positioned lower than an end portion on an opposite side to the head (FIG. 9A and FIG. 10 of Endo discloses inclining the light source.).
With respect to claim 8, Tsuchiya in view of Endo discloses wherein the irradiation face has a planar shape, and disposed inclined so as to have an end portion on the head side positioned lower than an end portion on an opposite side to the head (FIG. 9A and FIG. 10 of Endo discloses inclining the light source.).
2. Claim(s) 4-7 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20140354743 to Tsuchiya (hereinafter “Tsuchiya”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20140152734 to Endo et al. (hereinafter “Endo”) and in further view of JP Patent Publication No. 2010234818 to Makado. (hereinafter “Makado”).
With respect to claim 4, Tsuchiya in view of Endo discloses The printing device of claim 1.
However, Tsuchiya in view of Endo fails to specifically disclose:
further comprising a duct that is arranged between the head and the light irradiation device and comprises a suction port for sucking a mist generated from the head.
The tertiary reference Makado discloses:
further comprising a duct that is arranged between the head and the light irradiation device and comprises a suction port for sucking a mist generated from the head (40/41/39 FIG. 3).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the duct as disclosed by Makado with the method/apparatus of Tsuchiya. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve mist removal and help prevent the heads from getting clogged. (FIG. 3 of Makado).
With respect to claim 5, Tsuchiya in view of Endo and Makado discloses wherein the light irradiation device comprises a light source that emits a light and a cooling fan that cools the light source, and the duct is connected to a negative pressure side of the cooling fan (31/40/41/39 FIG. 3).
With respect to claim 6, Tsuchiya in view of Endo and Makado discloses wherein the electrostatic flocking part is arranged in a portion facing the mounting face, of the duct (56 FIG. 6 [0052] of Endo and 31/40/41/39 FIG. 3 of Makado).
With respect to claim 7, Tsuchiya in view of Endo and Makado discloses wherein the electrostatic flocking part is arranged in a portion facing the mounting face, of the duct (56 FIG. 6 [0052] of Endo and 31/40/41/39 FIG. 3 of Makado).
With respect to claim 9, Tsuchiya in view of Endo and Makado discloses further comprising a duct that is arranged between the head and the light irradiation device and comprises a suction port for sucking a mist generated from the head (31/40/41/39 FIG. 3 of Makado).
With respect to claim 10, Tsuchiya in view of Endo and Makado discloses further comprising a duct that is arranged between the head and the light irradiation device and comprises a suction port for sucking a mist generated from the head (31/40/41/39 FIG. 3 of Makado).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bradley W Thies whose telephone number is (571)270-5667. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30 am -6:00 pm.
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) 272-5960. 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.
/BRADLEY W THIES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights