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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed July 2, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-7 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims and Specification have overcome the objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on March 2, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11 and 12, filed July 2, 2026, with respect to the double patenting rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The double patenting rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed July 2, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,665,031 to Nagasaki (hereinafter Nagasaki) in view of US 2018/0231909 to Takada (hereinafter Takada), have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Takada does not teach or suggest timing correction information that is specific to the optical scanning apparatus and that indicates a deviation amount of an output timing of the beam detection signal from an ideal output timing of the beam detection signal (at pages 13 and 14 of remarks dated 7/2/2026). The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The examiner notes that the guidelines for analyzing claims is to examine the claim language by giving the broadest reasonable interpretation (“During patent examination, the pending claims must be ‘given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.’ The Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) expressly recognized that the USPTO employs the ‘broadest reasonable interpretation’”; MPEP 2111); more specifically claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Takeda discloses that writing position is equivalent to writing timing ([0026], [0027], [0037]), and the premise of the invention is adjustment of timing (correction of timing) using set values that are acquired correction information (timing correction information) (Abstract, [0014], [0056]). Therefore, Takeda does teach timing correction information, and as understood by the examiner, Takeda teaches timing correction information that is specific to the optical scanning apparatus and that indicates a deviation amount of an output timing of the beam detection signal from an ideal output timing of the beam detection signal ([0037], [0056]; Fig. 3; further explained in the below with rejection of claim 1).
For the reasons provided above, the examiner disagrees with the applicant’s arguments and finds them not persuasive.
Further, the applicant argues, at page 15, that there is not sufficient rational for modifying Nagasaki et al. with Takada, specifically because the technical purposes of the references are different. The examiner notes that the guidelines for using references for an obviousness rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 require that the provided motivation for combining references does not have to be the same motivation as that of the inventor(s) of the claimed invention ("In determining obviousness, neither the particular motivation to make the claimed invention nor the problem the inventor is solving controls”; MPEP 2141 III). Nagasaki et al. and Takeda are both directed to at least the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, that is correction for an image forming apparatus, specifically utilizing a means for controlling illumination or exposure (noted by the shared CPC G03G 15/043).
Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 of Nagasaki et al. in view of Takada will be maintained, and additional teaching of Takeda will be included to provide more clarification.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagasaki et al. (US 9665031 B2), hereinafter referred to as Nagasaki, in further view of Takada (US 20180231909 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nagasaki teaches an image forming apparatus (image forming apparatus 9; col. 3, ll. 10-11; Fig. 1) comprising:
a photoreceptor that is rotationally driven (photosensitive drum 4; col. 3, ll. 18; Fig. 1);
an image signal generation unit configured to generate an image signal based on image data (image signal generation unit 100; col. 8; ll. 11-14; Figs. 1 and 4);
an optical scanning apparatus (optical scanning device 400; col. 3, ll. 13; Figs. 1 and 2) configured to scan the photoreceptor (“scans the surface of the photosensitive drum 4”; col. 3, ll. 20) with a light beam (“with a laser beam”; col. 3, ll. 21-22) having a scanning speed changing in accordance with a position in a main scanning direction (image height of laser beam 208 on scanned surface 407 is found in the main scanning direction; col. 5, ll. 55-58; “the scanning speed gradually increases as the image height changes from the on-axis image height to an off-axis image height”; col. 6, ll. 56-58),
the optical scanning apparatus configured to form an electrostatic latent image on the photoreceptor by scanning the photoreceptor in the main scanning direction with the light beam corresponding to the image signal generated by the image signal generation unit (“optical scanning device 400 outputs a laser beam 208 from a light source based on an image signal that is output from an image signal generation unit 100” col. 3, ll. 13-15; “thereby forming an electrostatic latent image thereon”; col. 3, ll. 22-23);
and a control unit (control unit 1; col. 3, ll. 13-16; Fig. 1) configured to output, to the image signal generation unit, a horizontal synchronization signal for determining a timing at which the image signal generation unit outputs the image signal to the optical scanning apparatus (“control unit 1… transmits a TOP signal, which is a sub scanning synchronization signal, and a BD signal, which is a main scanning synchronization signal, to the image signal generation unit 100. The image signal generation unit 100 outputs a VDO signal, which is an image signal, to the laser drive unit 300 at a predetermined timing based on these synchronization signals”; col. 8, ll. 46-53; Fig. 4; “laser drive unit 300 that drives a light source is housed within a housing 410 of an optical scanning device 400”; col. 3, ll. 11-13; Fig. 1), wherein
the optical scanning apparatus includes
a light source that emits the light beam (“light source 401 of the optical scanning device 400 is a light source that outputs a laser beam”; col. 3, ll. 48-49),
a rotary polygon mirror for scanning the photoreceptor in the main scanning direction by the light beam emitted by the light source(“deflector 405 is an example of a scanning unit that performs scanning with the laser beam 208”; col. 3, ll. 65-68; “deflector 405 may be a rotating polygonal mirror”; col. 4, ll. 1; Fig. 2),
a beam detection sensor that detects the light beam reflected by the rotary polygon mirror and outputs, to the control unit, a beam detection signal indicating a detection timing of the light beam (“A BD sensor 409 and a BD lens 408 are members of an optical system for synchronization that determines the timing of writing an electrostatic latent image on the scanned surface 407. "BD" is the abbreviation for "beam detect". The luminous flux that has passed through the BD lens 408 enters, and is detected by, the BD sensor 409 that includes a photodiode. The control unit 1 controls the writing timing based on the timing at which the BD sensor 409 detects the luminous flux.”; col. 4, ll. 40-48), and
a memory (“memory 304 is a non-volatile storage unit, and stores therein control parameters related to the laser drive unit 300”; col. 8, ll. 33-34; Fig. 4), and
wherein the control unit corrects a reference time from reception of the beam detection signal from the beam detection sensor to the output of the horizontal synchronization signal, and output the horizontal signal to the image signal generation unit at a timing after a period corrected from reception of the beam detection signal (“control unit 1 controls the writing timing based on the timing at which the BD sensor 409 detects the luminous flux”; col. 4, ll. 47-48; “The image signal generation unit 100 outputs a VDO signal, which is an image signal, to the laser drive unit 300 at a predetermined timing based on these synchronization signals; col. 8, ll. 50-53; Fig. 4).
Nagasaki does not teach that the memory stores timing correction information that is specific to the optical scanning apparatus and that indicates a deviation amount of an output timing of the beam detection signal from an ideal output timing of the beam detection signal and that the control unit corrects, based on the timing correction information acquired from the memory, a reference time from reception of the beam detection signal from the beam detection sensor to output of the horizontal synchronization signal.
Takada teaches an image correction device that corrects image distortion before an image is formed ([0015]). The image correction device 50 includes a laser control unit 51, a CPU interface 52, a static random access memory (SRAM) controller 53, an SRAM 54, and a pulse width modulation (PWM) control unit 55 ([0036]). Takada further discloses that the detection signal BD is supplied to the PWM control unit 55 from the optical sensors 49L and 49R whenever scanning corresponding to image data of one line is performed. A writing position adjustment value for adjusting an image writing position (writing timing) in the main scanning direction is supplied to the PWM control unit 55 from the SRAM 54, and thus the PWM control unit 55 adjusts the detection signal BD on the basis of the set value. The PWM control unit 55 supplies a scanning synchronization signal H-SYNC (a synchronization signal in which a writing position is adjusted) obtained through the adjustment to the laser control unit 51 ([0037]).
That is, Takada discloses a memory (SRAM 54) storing timing correction information that is specific to the optical scanning apparatus and that indicates a deviation amount of an output timing of the beam detection signal from an ideal output timing of the beam detection signal (adjusting the detection signal on the basis of the set value; [0037]). Illustrated below is Fig. 3 marked and annotated illustrating a deviation amount of an output timing from an ideal output timing.
PNG
media_image1.png
677
633
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control parameters stored in the memory and used by the control unit taught by Nagasaki to also include timing correction information to improve image quality as taught by Takada ([0056]).
Regarding claim 3, Nagasaki teaches an image forming apparatus wherein the control unit of the image signal generation unit executes, with reference to the horizontal synchronization signal (“control unit 1… transmits a TOP signal, which is a sub scanning synchronization signal, and a BD signal, which is a main scanning synchronization signal, to the image signal generation unit 100. The image signal generation unit 100 outputs a VDO signal, which is an image signal, to the laser drive unit 300 at a predetermined timing based on these synchronization signals”; col. 8, ll. 46-53; Fig. 4),
first correction control of correcting a change in a pixel width due to a change in the scanning speed (“partial magnification correction, by which the irradiation time (exposure time) of the light source 401 per pixel in the image data is reduced according to the amount of increase in the partial magnification as the image height changes from the on-axis image height to the off-axis image height; col. 9, ll. 49-54; “the scanning speed gradually increases as the image height changes from the on-axis image height to an off-axis image height, and accordingly the partial magnification increases”; col. 6, ll. 56-59) and
second correction control of correcting a change in an exposure amount due to the change in the scanning speed (“By applying luminance correction and changing the luminance of the light source 401, the total exposure amount (integrated light amount) per pixel at each image height becomes equal”; col. 14, ll. 40-43).
Regarding claim 4, Nagasaki teaches an image forming apparatus wherein the image data is data indicating whether or not to expose each of pixel pieces in which one pixel is divided (“a single pixel 157 corresponds to one of the units that partition the image data... As shown in FIG. 7B, a single pixel before pixel width correction is composed of pixel pieces that are smaller than a single pixel”; col. 10, ll. 6-11; Figs. 7A, 7B, 10A, and 10B), and
the first correction control is a control of extracting data of at least one of the pixel pieces indicated by the image data or inserting data of at least one pixel piece into the image data in accordance with the scanning speed in order to correct the change in the pixel width due to the change in the scanning speed (“An insertion/removal control unit 128 and the FIFO 124 function as a width correction unit (magnification correction unit) that corrects the exposure time (scanning time) for each of the latent images respectively corresponding to pixels of the image data such that the widths of the latent images respectively corresponding to the pixels of the image data in the moving direction of the spot of the laser beam 208 are equal”; col. 10, ll. 22-29; Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 5, Nagasaki teaches an image forming apparatus wherein the image signal generation unit outputs the image signal to the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with an image clock, and the first correction control is a control of changing a frequency of the image clock in accordance with the scanning speed in order to correct the change in the pixel width due to the change in the scanning speed (“The CPU 102 may correct the exposure time for each of the latent images respectively corresponding to the pixels by controlling the PLL unit 127 and changing the frequency of a clock signal (VCLK×N, where N is a number for multiplication) that has synchronized with the video signal that conveys the image data according to the scanning position in the main scanning direction”; col. 28, ll. 28-35; Figs. 4 and 6).
Regarding claim 6, Nagasaki teaches an image forming apparatus wherein the second correction control is a control of changing emission luminance of the light source of the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with the scanning speed in order to correct the change in the exposure amount due to the change in the scanning speed (“the total exposure amount (integrated light amount) per pixel according to the light source 401 decreases as the absolute value of the image height Y increases. That is, the correction of the luminance of the laser beam 208 is required for pixels at which the exposure amount decreases as an adverse effect of partial magnification correction. By applying luminance correction and changing the luminance of the light source 401, the total exposure amount (integrated light amount) per pixel at each image height becomes equal. That is, the image density in the main scanning direction is approximately even”; col. 14, ll. 34-43).
Regarding claim 7, Nagasaki teaches an image forming apparatus wherein the second correction control is a control of correcting a pixel value indicated by the image data in accordance with the scanning speed in order to correct the change in the exposure amount due to the change in the scanning speed (“the density correction unit 121 reads out the density correction value from the buffer in synchronization with the BD signal, and corrects the image density (the density values, the color tone values, and the like) of the image data such that the total exposure amount per unit length becomes appropriate at each image height”; col. 17, ll. 67 - col. 18, ll. 5; Fig. 11).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagasaki in view of Takeda as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Furuta et al. (US 20170285510 A1), hereinafter referred to as Furuta.
Regarding claim 2, Nagasaki as modified by Takeda teach the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, however neither Nagasaki nor Takeda explicitly teach wherein the deviation amount indicated by the timing correction information corresponds to a difference between an actual timing at which the beam detection sensor detects the light beam and a reference timing at which the beam detection sensor should detect the light beam.
Furuta teaches an image forming apparatus (image forming apparatus 100; [0043]; Fig. 1) wherein a deviation amount of timing correction information corresponds to a difference between an actual timing at which the beam detection sensor detects the light beam and a reference timing at which the beam detection sensor should detect the light beam (correction amounts (Tofset) are calculated for actual timing/intervals (Tbdbd) in relation to reference timing/intervals (Tref), and the correction amounts are then stored in RAM; [0070]; S105- S107; Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the image forming apparatus as taught by Nagasaki and Takeda to have the deviation amount correspond to a difference between an actual timing at which the beam detection sensor detects the light beam and a reference timing at which the beam detection sensor should detect the light beam for the purpose of determining and correcting a deviation in timing due to changes in the image forming apparatus, such as deformations within the apparatus due to internal temperature post factory shipment, as taught by Furuta ([0005]-[0009]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYRA M VAN KREUNINGEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9423. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 9:00am-6:00pm and Fri 9:00am-1:00pm.
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 X RODRIGUEZ can be reached at (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 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.
27 July 2026
/KYRA MELOR VAN KREUNINGEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights