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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm’r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/17/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-22 is/are pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) submitted by applicant on 03/17/2026 has/have been considered. The submission(s) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.97.
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) 1-14 and 17-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5912688 to Gragg (hereinafter “Gragg”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 6273563 to Volker (hereinafter “Volker”).
With respect to claim 1, Gragg discloses an inkjet cartridge (cartridge 52 of FIG. 1) comprising: a reservoir operable to contain a solution (reservoir 526 FIG. 5); and a pressure regulator disposed in the reservoir at a location to be in contact with a solution contained in the reservoir (spring 528 FIG. 5), the pressure regulator comprising a spring (spring 528 FIG. 5)
However, Gragg fails to specifically disclose:
comprising a non-metallic material.
Volker discloses:
comprising a non-metallic material (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, Summary).
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 non-metallic material as disclosed by Volker with the method/apparatus of Gragg. The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure excellent resilient properties over a long service life and allow for injection molding. (Summary of Volker).
With respect to claim 2, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the non-metallic material of the spring comprises a polymer material (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, Summary of Volker).
With respect to claim 3, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the spring comprises a polymer material comprising a glass transition temperature between -1200C and 1800C (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, “polyoxymethylene (POM)”, Summary of Volker).
With respect to claim 4, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the spring is a bow spring or a leaf spring (528 FIG. 5 of Gragg and bow-shape FIG. 1 of Volker).
With respect to claim 5, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the pressure regulator comprises a first plate and a second plate, wherein the spring is coupled to a first side of the first plate and to a first side of the second plate such that the spring is disposed between the first plate and the second plate (plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg and frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker).
With respect to claim 6, Gragg in view of Volker discloses further comprising: a casing defining an interior volume; and a first wall and an opposing second wall defining the reservoir in the interior volume (interior frame member 524 FIG. 5 of Gragg).
With respect to claim 7, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the pressure regulator comprises a first plate and a second plate (plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg and frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker), wherein the spring is coupled to a first side of the first plate and to a first side of the second plate such that the spring is disposed between the first plate and the second plate (plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg and frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker) and wherein a second side of the first plate is coupled to the first wall and a second side of the second plate is coupled to the second wall (plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg and frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker and 520 and 522 FIG. 5 of Gragg).
With respect to claim 8, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the non-metallic material of the spring comprises a polyethylene terephthalate (Volker discloses the spring being made of a thermoplastic with resilient properties Claim 13 of Volker, Additionally, using PET to make a cartridge spring was well known in the art at the time of the invention. For an example see U.S. Patent Publication No. 20010043256 to Seccombe et al. PET spring [0056]).
With respect to claim 9, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the non-metallic material of the spring comprises a polycarbonate, a polypropylene or a polyvinyl chloride (Volker discloses the spring being made of a thermoplastic with resilient properties Claim 13 of Volker. Additionally, using polypropylene to make a cartridge spring was well known in the art at the time of the invention. For an example see U.S. Patent Publication No. 20050237367 to Hagen et al. spring polypropylene [0013]).
With respect to claim 10, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the non-metallic material of the spring comprises a nylon, a high density polyethylene, a low density polyethylene or a polyester (Volker discloses the spring being made of a thermoplastic with resilient properties Claim 13 of Volker. Additionally, using polypropylene to make a cartridge spring was well known in the art at the time of the invention. For an example see U.S. Patent Publication No. 20050237367 to Hagen et al. spring polypropylene [0013]).
With respect to claim 11, Gragg in view of Volker discloses further comprising a frame coupled to an inner wall of the casing and conforming to a shape of a perimeter of the casing, wherein the first wall is coupled to a first side of the frame and the second wall is coupled to an opposite second side of the frame such that the frame, the first wall and the second wall define a volume of the reservoir (54 FIG. 5 of Gragg).
With respect to claim 12, Gragg in view of Volker discloses further comprising at least one filter coupled to the frame inside the volume of the reservoir, wherein the at least one filter comprises a non-metallic material (filter 536 of Gragg Additionally, many different types of filters were common and well known in the art at the time of the invention.).
With respect to claim 13, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the first wall and the second wall each comprise a flexible, non-elastic material and non-metallic material (54 FIG. 5 of Gragg).
With respect to claim 14, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the first wall and the second wall comprises a polymer that is chemically inert relative to a solution selected for containment in the reservoir (54 FIG. 5 of Gragg).
With respect to claim 17, Gragg in view of Volker discloses further comprising a printhead in fluid communication with the reservoir (ink-jet print head 540 FIG. 5 of Gragg).
With respect to claim 18, Gragg discloses An inkjet cartridge (cartridge 52 of FIG. 1) comprising: a casing defining an interior volume (interior frame member 524 FIG. 5 of Gragg); a first wall and an opposing second wall defining a reservoir in the interior volume (520 and 522 FIG. 5 of Gragg); and a pressure regulator disposed in the reservoir at a location to be in contact with a solution contained in the reservoir (spring 528 FIG. 5), the pressure regulator comprising a spring (spring 528 FIG. 5)
However, Gragg fails to specifically disclose:
comprising a non-metallic material.
Volker discloses:
comprising a non-metallic material (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, Summary).
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 non-metallic material as disclosed by Volker with the method/apparatus of Gragg. The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure excellent resilient properties over a long service life and allow for injection molding. (Summary of Volker).
With respect to claim 19, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the pressure regulator further comprises a first plate and a second plate each of which is comprised of non-metallic material (plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg and frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker), wherein the spring is coupled to a first side of the first plate and to a first side of the second plate such that the spring is disposed between the first plate and the second plate (spring 528 FIG. 5, plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg and frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker).
With respect to claim 20, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the spring comprises a polymer material comprising a glass transition temperature between -120°C and 180°C (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, Summary, Claim 11 and 13).
With respect to claim 21, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the spring comprises a bow spring comprising two rhombus-shaped strips connected to one another at opposite ends (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, Summary, Claim 11 and 13, frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker and plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg Regarding claim 21, Volker discloses the claimed invention except for specifically identifying the rhombus shape. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use that shape, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Further, one would have been motivated to select the shape of rhombus for the purpose of properly fitting and applying pressure).
With respect to claim 22, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the spring comprises a bow spring comprising two rhombus-shaped strips connected to one another at opposite ends (spring element 10 FIG. 1 “composed of a plastics material”, Summary, Claim 11 and 13, frame parts 11 and 12 of Volker and plates 530 and 532 FIG. 5 of Gragg Regarding claim 22, Volker discloses the claimed invention except for specifically identifying the rhombus shape. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use that shape, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Further, one would have been motivated to select the shape of rhombus for the purpose of properly fitting and applying pressure).).
2. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5912688 to Gragg (hereinafter “Gragg”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 6273563 to Volker (hereinafter “Volker”) and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20050285886 to Okamoto (hereinafter “Okamoto”).
With respect to claim 15, Gragg in view of Volker discloses wherein the polymer comprises the first wall and the second wall (FIG. 5 of Gragg,
However, Gragg in view of Volker fails to specifically disclose:
a coating.
The tertiary reference Okamoto discloses:
a coating (coating [0050]).
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 a coating as disclosed by Okamoto with the method/apparatus of Gragg. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve interface and the effectiveness of the walls also to help prevent punctures. ([0050] of Okamoto). Additionally, coating walls was common practice and well known at the time of the invention.
3. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5912688 to Gragg (hereinafter “Gragg”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 6273563 to Volker (hereinafter “Volker”) and in further view of U.S. Patent No. 6000791 to Scheffelin et al. (hereinafter “Scheffelin”).
With respect to claim 16, Gragg in view of Volker discloses the inkjet cartridge.
However, Gragg in view of Volker fails to specifically disclose:
a stopper disposed between an exterior of the casing and the reservoir and the stopper comprises a non- metallic material.
The tertiary reference Scheffelin discloses:
a stopper disposed between an exterior of the casing and the reservoir and the stopper comprises a non- metallic material (89 FIG. 9 of Scheffelin).
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 stopper as disclosed by Scheffelin with the method/apparatus of Gragg. The motivation for doing so would have been to create a fluid tight seal. (89 FIG. 9 of Scheffelin). Additionally, stoppers were common practice and well known at the time of the invention.
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