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
Claims 8, 15 and 18-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/17/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. These IDS have been considered.
Priority
4. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawings
5. The examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 06/04/2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka (JP 06-056299), in view of Uchiyama et al. (US Pub. Nº 2011/0115153).
9. Regarding independent claim 1: Yamanaka disclosed a printing apparatus ([0006], line 1; also see Fig. 1) comprising:
a printing part configured to perform printing ([0018], line 8; also see Fig. 1, reference 2) on printing media (Fig. 2, reference S);
a first conveyance unit ([0019], lines 5-6; also see Fig. 2, reference 8) configured to convey a first printing medium in a conveyance direction in an overlapping state in which a trailing end of the first printing medium and a leading end of a second printing medium that follows the first printing medium overlap with each other in the conveyance direction ([0032], lines 1-3; also see Fig. 1, which shows a trailing end of sheet S2 overlapping the leading end of sheet S3);
a second conveyance unit arranged on a downstream side relative to the first
conveyance unit in the conveyance direction and configured to convey the first printing
medium and the second printing medium on which printing has been done by the printing
part (Fig. 1; rollers 22 and 23 of the fixing unit 13 convey printing medium S1 on which printing has been performed); and
a control unit configured to control the second conveyance unit to convey the first
printing medium at a first speed so as to eliminate the overlapping state ([0038], lines 1-4).
Yamanaka is silent about the control unit controlling the second conveyance unit to convey the first printing medium at a second speed slower than the first speed after the elimination of the overlapping state.
Uchiyama et al. disclosed a printing apparatus (Fig. 2), comprising a printing unit ([0022], line 2; also see Fig. 2, reference 4), at least one conveyance unit disposed downstream of the printing unit (Fig. 2, references 8a), and a control unit ([0085], line 2), configured to reduce the conveyance speed of the at least one conveyance unit prior to discharging the printing medium ([0063], lines 7-9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchiyama et al. with those of Yamanaka by reducing the conveyance speed of the printing medium after the overlapping state has been eliminated in order to ensure a reliable discharge operation of said printing medium from the printing apparatus as disclosed by Uchiyama et al. in paragraph [0063].
10. Regarding claim 2: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first conveyance unit conveys the first printing medium that has been already in the overlapping state (Yamanaka Fig. 1; while the leading end of medium S3 is overlapping the trailing end of S2, the trailing end of S3 is still being conveyed by roller pair 8 (see Fig. 2 for further clarifications)).
11. Regarding claim 4: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, after the trailing end of the first printing medium passes through the first conveyance unit (Yamanaka Fig. 1; by the time the overlapping state is eliminated, the first medium has already cleared the first conveyance unit 8 (see Fig. 2 for further clarifications)), the overlapping state is eliminated by conveying the first printing medium at the first speed using the second conveyance unit, and wherein the first speed is faster than a conveyance speed of the first conveyance unit conveying the second printing medium (Yamanaka [0038], lines 1-4).
12. Regarding claim 5: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the control unit changes a conveyance speed of the second conveyance unit conveying the first printing medium from the first speed to the second speed at the time the trailing end of the first printing medium reaches a predetermined position on an upstream side relative to the second conveyance unit (Yamanaka [0037], lines 3-7).
13. Regarding claim 11: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1 comprising a third conveyance unit arranged between the first conveyance unit and the second conveyance unit and configured to convey the printing media (Yamanaka [0038], lines 9-11; also see Fig. 1, reference 29).
14. Regarding claim 13: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the conveyance speed at the time of discharging the first printing medium is slower than the conveyance speed of the first conveyance unit conveying the first printing medium and the second printing medium at the time the printing part performs printing on the first printing medium (Uchiyama et al. [0063], lines 7-9).
15. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka (JP 06-056299), in view of Uchiyama et al. (US Pub. Nº 2011/0115153) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-5, 11 and 13 above and further in view of Kodama (JP 2016-087900).
16. Regarding claim 6: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 5.
The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. is silent about wherein the control unit switches whether or not to change the conveyance speed of the second conveyance unit to be slower than the first speed, according to a predetermined condition contributing to a state of the first printing medium on which printing has been done.
Kodama disclosed a printing apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising a control unit ([0030], line 1), wherein the control unit changes the conveyance speed of a downstream conveyance unit to be slower than a first speed ([0072], lines 4-8), according to a predetermined condition contributing to a state of a printing medium on which printing has been done ([0077], lines 1-4 and [0078], lines 5-9; the conveyance speed of the downstream roller 19 is reduced according to a dryness of the printing medium).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kodama with those of the combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. by reducing the conveyance speed of the printing medium by the downstream roller in order to prevent curling of the printing medium as disclosed by Kodama in paragraph [0077].
17. Regarding claim 7: The combination of Yamanaka, Uchiyama et al. and Kodama disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the predetermined condition contributing to a state of the first printing medium (1P) on which printing has been done is a printing duty (Kodama [0077], lines 1-4 and [0078], lines 5-9).
18. Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka (JP 06-056299), in view of Uchiyama et al. (US Pub. Nº 2011/0115153) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-5, 11 and 13 above and further in view of Stemmle (US Pat. Nº 4,918,490).
19. Regarding claim 9: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1.
The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. is silent about comprising a tray to which the printing media conveyed by the second conveyance unit are discharged in a face-down manner.
Stemmle disclosed a similar invention with a printing apparatus (Fig. 1), comprising a printing unit (Fig. 1, reference 32), a first conveyance unit disposed upstream of the printing unit (Fig. 1, reference 78) a second conveyance unit disposed downstream of the printing unit (Fig. 1, references 80), and comprising a tray to which the printing media conveyed by the second conveyance unit are discharged in a face-down manner (Fig. 1, reference 86).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Stemmle with those of the combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. by discharging the printing medium in a face-down manner on the discharge tray in order to preserve the confidentiality of the printed information as commonly known in the art.
20. Regarding claim 10: The combination of Yamanaka, Uchiyama et al. and Stemmle disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the tray is arranged above the printing part (Stemmle Fig. 1).
21. Claims 3, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka (JP 06-056299), in view of Uchiyama et al. (US Pub. Nº 2011/0115153) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-5, 11 and 13 above and further in view of Yamamoto et al. (US Pub. Nº 2010/0073449).
22. Regarding claim 3: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1.
The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. is silent about wherein the first conveyance unit performs conveyance by nipping the printing media using a first roller arranged on the downstream side relative to the printing part in the conveyance direction.
Yamamoto et al. disclosed a printing apparatus (see Fig. 2), comprising a printing part (Fig. 2, reference 21), a first conveyance unit (Fig. 2, references 24 and 25), a second conveyance unit arranged downstream of the first conveyance unit (Fig. 2, references 46), wherein the first conveyance unit performs conveyance by nipping the printing media using a first roller arranged on the downstream side relative to the printing part in the conveyance direction ([0060], lines 3-6; both the roller pair 24 and the roller pair 25 convey the printing medium during printing).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yamamoto et al. with those of the combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. by providing a first conveyance unit downstream of the printing part in order to better adjust the stretching of the printing medium in the printing section as commonly known in the art.
23. Regarding claim 12: The combination of Yamanaka, Uchiyama et al. and Yamamoto et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the second conveyance unit performs conveyance and discharging by nipping the printing media using a second roller arranged on the downstream side relative to the first roller in the conveyance direction (Yamanaka Fig. 1; references 22 and 23; also see the rejection of claim 1), and wherein, at the point in time where the upstream end of the first printing medium reaches a nip part of the second roller, the upstream end of the first printing medium is located on the downstream side relative to the downstream end of the second printing medium in the conveyance direction (Yamanaka Fig. 1; when the upstream end of printing medium S1 reaches the nip between rollers 22 and 23, the upstream end of sheet S1 is located downstream of the downstream end of printing medium S2).
24. Regarding claim 14: The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. disclosed the printing apparatus according to claim 1.
The combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. is silent about wherein the printing apparatus is a serial-type printing apparatus that alternately performs an operation of scanning in a direction intersecting the conveyance direction while the printing part performs printing by ejecting ink onto the printing media and a conveyance operation in which the printing media are conveyed in the conveyance direction, and wherein the conveyance speed at the time the printing part performs printing on the first printing medium is an average conveyance speed under the assumption that the conveyance operation which is intermittent conveyance is continuous conveyance.
Yamamoto et al. disclosed a printing apparatus (see Fig. 2), comprising a printing part (Fig. 2, reference 21), a first conveyance unit (Fig. 2, references 24 and 25), a second conveyance unit arranged downstream of the first conveyance unit (Fig. 2, references 46), wherein the printing apparatus is a serial-type printing apparatus that alternately performs an operation of scanning in a direction intersecting the conveyance direction while the printing part performs printing by ejecting ink onto the printing media ([0058], lines 1-6) and a conveyance operation in which the printing media are conveyed in the conveyance direction, and wherein the conveyance speed at the time the printing part performs printing on the first printing medium is an average conveyance speed under the assumption that the conveyance operation which is intermittent conveyance is continuous conveyance ([0060], lines 3-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yamamoto et al. with those of the combination of Yamanaka and Uchiyama et al. by using the printing unit of Yamamoto et al. in the apparatus of Yamanaka in order to support ink jet printing.
Allowable Subject Matter
25. Claims 16 and 17 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.
26. Regarding claim 16: The prior art of record failed to disclose or render obvious the printing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the first conveyance unit includes the first roller, a third roller arranged on the downstream side relative to the first roller and the upstream side relative to the second roller in the conveyance direction, and a driving source that drives the first roller and the third roller together, and wherein the third roller is capable of conveying the printing media at a speed faster than the first roller.
Conclusion
27. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAOVI M. AMEH whose telephone number is (571)272-4578. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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.
/YAOVI M AMEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853