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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited on a Form PTO 1449 have been considered.
Specification
The specification has been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. However, the applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7, 9-12, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwasaki (U.S. 2023/0014175 A1).
Iwasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a printer (Title) comprising:
at least one thermal printhead (TPH, Abstract) comprising:
a plurality of dots, wherein each dot has an associated resistance, wherein the plurality of dots are arranged in a first pattern, and wherein the first pattern includes a first end and a second end; and
a processor and a non-transitory memory (31, 32, 35, §§0026-0028 and Fig. 3) comprising a computer program code, the non-transitory memory and the computer program code configured to, with the processor, cause the printer to:
determine a resistance value for each dot of the plurality of dots (Abstract);
compare the resistance value associated with at least one dot associated with the first end and at least one dot associated with the second end with a predefined threshold resistance value (§§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9);
identify at least one dot having a high resistance value based at least on the comparison (§§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9); and
identify a type of TPH of the at least one TPH based at least on the at least one dot identified (freshly replaced or previously installed, §§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9).
Regarding Claim 6, wherein the predefined threshold resistance value associated with the plurality of dots is stored in the non-transitory memory (§0038).
Regarding Claim 7, wherein the non-transitory memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the processor, cause the printer to read the resistance value of each of the plurality of dots during a booting phase of the printer (§0038-§0039).
Regarding Claim 9, wherein the plurality of dots define a range between 0-N dots (§0039).
Regarding Claim 10, wherein the type of TPH of the at least one TPH identified is one of a plurality of TPH series (freshly replaced or previously installed, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 11, wherein the first pattern of the plurality of dots corresponds to a resistance pattern of the plurality of dots, wherein the resistance pattern defines the type of TPH of the at least one TPH (freshly replaced or previously installed, §§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9).
Regarding independent Claim 12, a method (Title) comprising:
determining a resistance value for each dot of a plurality of dots of at least one thermal printhead (TPH, Abstract), wherein the plurality of dots are arranged in a first pattern, and wherein the first pattern includes a first end and a second end;
comparing the resistance value associated with at least one dot associated with the first end and at least one dot associated with the second end with a predefined threshold resistance value (§§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9);
identifying at least one dot having a high resistance value based at least on the comparison (§§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9); and
identifying a type of TPH of the at least one TPH, based at least on the at least one dot identified (freshly replaced or previously installed, §§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9).
Regarding Claim 17, storing the predefined threshold resistance value associated with the plurality of dots (§0038).
Regarding Claim 18, reading the resistance value of each of the plurality of dots during a booting phase of a printer (§0038-§0039).
Regarding Claim 20, 20. The method of claim 12, wherein the type of TPH of the at least one TPH identified one of a plurality of TPH series (freshly replaced or previously installed, §§0057-0066 and Figs. 8-9).
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) 8 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (U.S. 2023/0014175 A1).
Iwasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 8, all limitations of Claim 1, from which this Claim depends;
wherein the resistance value of each dot defines a range of TPH resistance specification ohms +/- certain manufacturing tolerance (§0034).
Regarding Claim 19, all limitations of Claim 12, from which this Claim depends;
wherein the resistance value of each dot defines a range of TPH resistance specification ohms +/- certain manufacturing tolerance (§0034).
Iwasaki does not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 8, the range of TPH resistance specification being 900 ohms +/- 7%. However, Iwasaki does disclose similar ranges (Figs. 8-9), making Claim 8 obvious over prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding Claim 19, the range of TPH resistance specification being 900 ohms +/- 7%. However, Iwasaki does disclose similar ranges (Figs. 8-9), making Claim 8 obvious over prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (U.S. 2023/0014175 A1) as applied to Claim 1, in view of Erhardt (U.S. 2007/0081842 A1).
Iwasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claims 2-4, all limitations of Claim 1, from which these Claims depend;
Regarding Claim 3, wherein the at least one TPH further comprising a plurality of heaters, wherein each of the plurality of heaters is associated with one dot of the plurality of dots (§0023).
Iwasaki does not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the non-transitory memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the processor, cause the printer to determine a thermal management technique based at least on the type of TPH of the at least one TPH identified.
Regarding Claim 4, wherein the non-transitory memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the processor, cause the printer to adjust a thermal output of the plurality of heaters based at least on the determined thermal management technique.
Erhardt discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the non-transitory memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the processor, cause the printer to determine a thermal management technique based at least on the type of TPH of the at least one TPH identified (§§0049-0051). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Erhardt to the printer of Iwasaki to enable printing on various substrates.
Regarding Claim 4, wherein the non-transitory memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the processor, cause the printer to adjust a thermal output of the plurality of heaters based at least on the determined thermal management technique (§§0004, 0007-0008, 0049-0051, 0067). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Erhardt to the printer of Iwasaki to enable printing on various substrates.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (U.S. 2023/0014175 A1) as applied to Claim 12, in view of Erhardt (U.S. 2007/0081842 A1).
Iwasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claims 13-15, all limitations of Claim 12, from which these Claims depend;
Regarding Claim 14, wherein the at least one TPH further comprising a plurality of heaters, wherein each of the plurality of heaters is associated with one dot of the plurality of dots (§0023).
Iwasaki does not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 13, determining a thermal management technique based at least on the type of TPH of the at least one TPH identified.
Regarding Claim 15, adjusting a thermal output of the plurality of heaters, based at least on the determined thermal management technique.
Erhardt discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 13, determining a thermal management technique based at least on the type of TPH of the at least one TPH identified (§§0049-0051). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Erhardt to the method of Iwasaki to enable printing on various substrates.
Regarding Claim 15, adjusting a thermal output of the plurality of heaters, based at least on the determined thermal management technique (§§0004, 0007-0008, 0049-0051, 0067). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Erhardt to the method of Iwasaki to enable printing on various substrates.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (U.S. 2023/0014175 A1) as applied to Claim 1, in view of Qu et al. (U.S. 2015/0266324 A1).
Iwasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claims 5, all limitations of Claim 1, from which this Claim depends.
Iwasaki does not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 5, wherein the plurality of dots correspond to a plurality of shift registers associated with the at least one TPH.
Qu et al. disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 5, wherein the plurality of dots correspond to a plurality of shift registers associated with the at least one TPH. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Qi et al. to the printer of Iwasaki to enable controlling the printer using a control architecture known to be suitable for the purpose.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (U.S. 2023/0014175 A1) as applied to Claim 12, in view of Qu et al. (U.S. 2015/0266324 A1).
Iwasaki discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claims 16, all limitations of Claim 12, from which this Claim depends.
Iwasaki does not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 16, wherein the plurality of dots correspond to a plurality of shift registers associated with the at least one TPH.
Qu et al. disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding Claim 16, wherein the plurality of dots correspond to a plurality of shift registers associated with the at least one TPH. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Qi et al. to the method of Iwasaki to enable controlling the printer using a control architecture known to be suitable for the purpose.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV whose telephone number is (571)270-7049. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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 Rodrigues 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.
/ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/JASON S UHLENHAKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853