Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
2. Claims 1, 4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0099602 (Harada et al.) (hereinafter “Harada”).
Regarding claim 1, Figs. 1-5B show a media conveying apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
a conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to convey a medium (101-1);
an imager (23a) to image the conveyed medium (101-1 in Fig. 3) to obtain an image; and
circuitry (Fig. 2) configured to:
determine whether the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) (See numbered paragraph [0051]);
control the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop conveyance of a subsequent medium (101-N) following the conveyed medium (101-1) based on a determination result indicating that the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) (See numbered paragraph [0053]);
control the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to resume medium conveyance according to a received instruction (user operation) to resume medium conveyance (See numbered paragraph [0053]); and
control the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop medium conveyance again in response to completion of conveyance of a first medium (carrier sheet in numbered paragraph [0054]) that is firstly conveyed after the conveyance of the subsequent medium (101-N) is stopped. Stopping medium conveyance occurs when the Harada apparatus is operated in the “second scanning mode” in numbered paragraph [0035], which completely conveys the carrier sheet during scanning the carrier sheet, reverses conveyance (i.e., stops moving the conveyance sheet in the initial conveyance direction), and then stops conveyance of the carrier sheet upon deposit into output tray 21.
Regarding claim 4, Figs. 1-5B show that the circuitry (Fig. 2) is configured to control the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop medium conveyance again based on a received instruction (second scanning mode). See, e.g., numbered paragraph [0046], which explains that sheet conveyance can be stopped in one direction to avoid contact of a staple with a scanning device and the sheet can be reversed.
Regarding claim 7, Figs. 1-5B show that the circuitry (Fig. 2) is configured to, based on the determination result, stop the conveyance of the subsequent medium (101-N) by controlling the conveyer (including 22a and 22b) to stop the conveyance of the conveyed medium (101-1) determined as having the adhering object (staple). See, e.g., numbered paragraph [0046], which explains that sheet conveyance can be stopped in one direction to avoid contact of a staple with a scanning device and the sheet can be reversed.
Regarding claim 8, Figs. 1-5B disclose a method of controlling a media conveying apparatus (Fig. 1), the method comprising:
conveying a medium (101-1) with a conveyor (including 22a and 22b);
imaging the conveyed medium (101-1) with an imager (23a) to obtain an image;
determining whether the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) (See numbered paragraph [0051]);
controlling the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop conveyance of a subsequent medium (101-N) following the conveyed medium (101-1) based on a determination result indicating that the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) (See numbered paragraph [0053]);
controlling the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to resume medium conveyance according to a received instruction (first scanning mode) to resume medium conveyance (See numbered paragraph [0053]); and
controlling the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop medium conveyance again in response to completion of conveyance of a first medium (carrier sheet in numbered paragraph [0054]) that is firstly conveyed after the conveyance of the subsequent medium (101-N) is stopped. Stopping medium conveyance occurs when the Harada apparatus is operated in the “second scanning mode” in numbered paragraph [0035], which completely conveys the carrier sheet during scanning the carrier sheet, reverses conveyance (i.e., stops moving the conveyance sheet in the initial conveyance direction), and then stops conveyance of the carrier sheet upon deposit into output tray 21.
Regarding claim 9, Figs. 1-5B show a non-transitory recording medium storing a plurality of program codes which, when executed by one or more processors (33 in Fig. 2), causes the processors (33) to perform a method for controlling a media conveying apparatus (Fig. 1), the method es comprising:
conveying a medium (101-1) with a conveyer (including 22a and 22b);
imaging the conveyed medium (101-1) with an imager (23a) to obtain an image;
determining whether the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) (See numbered paragraph [0051]);
controlling the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop conveyance of a subsequent medium (101-N) following the conveyed medium (101-1) based on a determination result indicating that the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) (See numbered paragraph [0053]);
controlling the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to resume medium conveyance according to a received instruction (first scanning mode) to resume medium conveyance (See numbered paragraph [0053]); and
controlling the conveyor (including 22a and 22b) to stop medium conveyance again in response to completion of conveyance of a first medium (carrier sheet in numbered paragraph [0054]) that is firstly conveyed after the conveyance of the subsequent medium (101-N) is stopped. Stopping medium conveyance occurs when the Harada apparatus is operated in the “second scanning mode” in numbered paragraph [0035], which completely conveys the carrier sheet during scanning the carrier sheet, reverses conveyance (i.e., stops moving the conveyance sheet in the initial conveyance direction), and then stops conveyance of the carrier sheet upon deposit into output tray 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
3. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0158447 (Link et al.) (hereinafter “Link”). With regard to claim 2, Figs. 1-5B of Harada show that the circuitry (Fig. 2) is configured to determine whether the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) based on pass-through information of a detector (numbered paragraph [0051]), but does not show pass-through information of an ultrasonic wave passing through the conveyed medium, as claimed.
Link shows that it is well-known in the art to provide a media conveying apparatus (Fig. 2) with circuitry (numbered paragraphs [0080] – [0081]) configured to determine whether a conveyed medium has an adhering object (staple) based on pass-through information of an ultrasonic wave passing through the conveyed medium. Because both Link and Harada teach staple detecting arrangements for detecting staples in sheets, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the detecting arrangement with the ultrasonic wave of Link for the detecting arrangement of Harada to achieve the predictable result of detecting staples in sheets.
4. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0116292 (Fujiki) (hereinafter “Fujiki”). With regard to claim 3, Figs. 1-5B of Harada show that the circuitry (Fig. 3) is configured to determine whether the conveyed medium (101-1) has an adhering object (staple) based on the image, as claimed.
Fujiki shows that it is well-known in the art to provide a media conveying apparatus (Fig. 3) with circuitry (numbered paragraph [0101]) configured to determine whether a conveyed medium has an adhering object (staple) based on an image of a sheet. See, numbered paragraph [0101} and Fig. 13. Because both Fujiki and Harada teach staple detecting arrangements for detecting staples in sheets, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the detecting arrangement of Fujiki for the detecting arrangement of Harada to achieve the predictable result of detecting staples in sheets.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 5 and 6 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.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS A MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Mike McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/THOMAS A MORRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights