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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of German Application No. DE10 2021 133 044.0 was received on 12 June 2024 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12 June 2021 and 18 October 2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 12 June 2024 are accepted.
Specification
The lengthy 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 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 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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baxter et al. (US PGPub 2003/0218663 A1), hereinafter Baxter.
With regard to Claim 1, Baxter discloses a method for printing on a surface of a workpiece (Abstract), comprising the steps of:
supplying to a printing controller a print template that is to be printed on the surface of the workpiece (¶0017-0021; ¶0058);
supplying surface information related to the workpiece, said surface information including at least one geometric feature of the surface to be printed on (¶0059);
determining, on the basis of the print template and the surface information, printing information for actuating a printing unit by adapting the print template (¶0065), at least in some regions (¶0065), to the surface to be printed on (¶0065) in accordance with the surface information (¶0065; 0076-0077; Figs. 1-6); and
transmitting the printing information to the printing unit (¶0076-0077), and printing the adapted print template on the surface of the workpiece (¶0074-0077; 0083-0085).
Baxter discloses supplying and selecting an image to apply to a door from among a plurality of images, but does not explicitly disclose the images being a “print template”. However, as set forth in applicant’s specification, the definition of the term “print template” as used by applicant is simply an image to be printed and adapted to the surface of a workpiece. Therefore, the image of Baxter meets this definition.
Although, Baxter does not explicitly disclose the term “supplying” to a printing controller a print template, the print controller of Baxter discloses “storing” images and adapting and adjusting the “image” based on the surface information (¶0058-0059). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in order for a printing controller to have images, the images must be “supplied”.
With regard to Claim 2, Baxter further discloses wherein the print template is adapted only in a region corresponding to the at least one geometric feature (¶0076-0077).
With regard to Claim 3, Baxter discloses a method according to claim 1, wherein the print template is adapted to the at least one geometric feature in such a way that a print image (¶0071-0077), which has been printed on the surface of the workpiece (¶0071-0077), of the adapted print template is matched to the supplied print template in the region of the at least one geometric feature (¶0071-0077).
With regard to Claim 4, Baxter further discloses a method according to claim 1, wherein the print template is adapted to the at least one geometric feature by changing at least one ink feature (¶0075, droplet size, space distance and depth manipulations; ¶0071, color density manipulations; ¶0077, a different density or color of droplets may be applied to channels), changing an image format, changing an image resolution, an image stretch or, extracting an image region.
With regard to Claim 5 wherein the at least one geometric feature is supplied as a configuration of an edge region (¶0091-0092), a contour (¶0083-0084), a slope, a cut-out, a hole, a coating, a seal, an insert, a display, of the surface to be printed on (¶0071-0077, 0097-0101).
With regard to Claim 6, Baxter further discloses a method according to claim 1, wherein the surface information including the at least one geometric feature is supplied either from a workpiece dataset (¶0071-0072, geometric features used by the image processor and print control device to create an image and the apparatus has a means of registering the position of the surface to be printed by identifying corners of the door or channels, thus, the surface information of the object must be known in advance, in order for the artwork to be tailored to the object surface; ¶0074) or by manual input.
With regard to Claim 7, Baxter further discloses a method wherein the surface information including the at least one geometric feature is acquired by an acquisition device (¶0072).
With regard to Claim 8, Baxter further discloses a method wherein the supplying of the surface information (¶0058-0059), the adaptation of the print template (¶0059, 0065), or the performance of the printing operation are carried out immediately one after the other (Fig. 4), simultaneously, or in real time.
With regard to Claim 9, Baxter further discloses wherein a corresponding print detail to be printed on the surface of the workpiece is determined from the supplied print template based on the supplied surface information (¶0097-0099).
With regard to Claim 10, Baxter further discloses a method wherein a droplet size or droplet volume applied by the printing unit is adapted to a slope angle of the at least one geometric feature in relation to a printing plane (¶0075, 0084).
With regard to Claim 11, Baxter further discloses a method wherein the print image of the adapted print template printed on the surface is acquired and supplied after the printing operation (¶0077), and the adapted print template is matched to the print template supplied to the printing controller based on the acquired print image or the surface information (¶0077).
With regard to Claim 12, Baxter discloses a printing device for printing on at least one surface of a workpiece (Figs. 4-5; printing device 40), comprising at least one printing unit (printing station 50; ¶0071) for performing a printing operation (Fig. 5; ¶0071), and a printing controller (62) for controlling the at least one printing unit (¶0071), wherein the method of claim 1 can be carried out by the printing device (see claim 1 above).
With regard to Claim 13, Baxter discloses a computer program for adapting and supplying a print template (¶0071), in particular for a printing device according to claim 12 (see claim 12 above), said computer program preferably being stored in a printing controller of the printing device (¶0071).
With regard to Claim 14, Baxter further discloses a computer program according to claim 13, wherein the computer program is stored in a printing controller of the printing device (¶0071).
With regard to Claim 15, Baxter further discloses a method according to claim 1, which is a digital printing process (¶0105).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT A. RICHMOND whose telephone number is (313)446-6547. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6:00 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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached on 571-431-0716. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SCOTT A RICHMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853