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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishida et al. US 2014/0363210 (Nishida).
Regarding claim 14, Nishida teaches the toner container according to Claim 1, wherein
when a direction in which the storage portion and the nozzle are aligned is defined as a first direction (FIG. 3),
the storage portion is a toner bottle including a cylindrical side surface extending in the first direction, a bottom surface that covers one end of the cylindrical side surface (FIG. 3), and
an opening at the other end of the cylindrical side surface (FIG.3).
Regarding claim 19, Nishida teaches a method for manufacturing a toner container, the toner container including
a storage portion (41) configured to store toner and a front-end portion including a nozzle (42) and having at least a part composed of a film, the method comprising:
supplying the toner (140) into the storage portion (¶0067);
covering at least part of the front-end portion including the nozzle with the film, wherein the nozzle includes a discharge port configured to discharge the toner stored in the storage portion to an outside of the toner container and a passage configured to enable the toner to pass through the passage toward the discharge port (¶0072); and
joining the storage portion storing the toner to the front end portion covered by the film (¶0072).
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 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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida et al. US 2014/0363210 (Nishida) and Koguchi et al. US 2021/0318642 A1 (Koguchi).
Regarding claim 1, Nishida teaches a toner container comprising:
a storage portion (15) including a pouch (41) configured to store toner;
a front end portion including a discharge port (42) configured to discharge the toner stored in the storage portion to an outside of the toner container and a nozzle including a passage configured to enable the toner to pass through the passage toward the discharge port (¶0058); and
a film (seal 46) configured to be in contact with the front-end portion and cover at least part of the front end portion (¶0072).
Nishida differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a nozzle provided with a discharge port configured to discharge the toner stored in the storage portion to an outside of the toner container and a nozzle including a passage configured to enable the toner to pass through the passage toward the discharge port, a shielding member movable between a shielding position in which the shielding member shields the discharge port of the nozzle and an open position in which the shielding member opens the discharge port of the nozzle. However this is a known configuration. Koguchi teaches a front end including a nozzle (600) provided with a discharge port (32r) configured to discharge the toner stored in the storage portion to an outside of the toner container and a nozzle including a passage configured to enable the toner to pass through the passage toward the discharge port, a shielding member (507/505) movable between a shielding position (FIG. 12A) in which the shielding member shields the discharge port of the nozzle and an open position (FIG. 12B) in which the shielding member opens the discharge port of the nozzle (FIG. 11). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the discharge port taught by Nishida to add the known element of the shutter mechanism taught by Koguchi since the combination would have yielded a predictable result to one skilled in the art, namely a spill proof discharge port.
Regarding claim 2, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Furthermore Nishida teaches a direction in which the storage portion and the nozzle are aligned is defined as a first direction (¶0072), the film is configured to have a cylindrical shape in which a first end in the first direction, and a second end opposite the first end are opened (FIG. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a joint portion. However, this is a known element. Koguchi teaches a joint portion (inner ring member 511 and outer ring member 510) in which the nozzle is joined to the storage portion (FIG. 5). When modifying Nishida to include the joint portion taught by Koguchi the result is a joint portion that is covered by the seal 46 since the joint does negate the need for a seal for security during shipping as taught by Nishida (¶0100). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the joint taught by Koguchi with the supply container pouch taught by Nishida since Koguchi teaches that these joints have the advantage of giving the user a place to grip the toner package (¶0086).
Regarding claim 4, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Furthermore the storage portion (15) further includes: wherein the pouch is formed from a sheet for storing toner (¶0057-¶0058).
Nishida differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a joint portion. However, this is a known element. Koguchi teaches a joint portion (inner ring member 511 and outer ring member 510) in which the nozzle is joined to the storage portion (FIG. 5). When modifying Nishida to include the joint portion taught by Koguchi the result is a joint portion that is covered by the seal 46 since the joint does negate the need for a seal for security during shipping as taught by Nishida (¶0100). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the joint taught by Koguchi with the supply container pouch taught by Nishida since Koguchi teaches that these joints have the advantage of giving the user a place to grip the toner package (¶0086).
Claims 5-11, 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida et al. US 2014/0363210 (Nishida), Koguchi et al. US 2021/0318642 A1 (Koguchi) and Oh US 2021/0276763 A1 (Oh).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a cap. However, caps are well known. Oh teaches a cap (20) configured to cover at least part of the front end portion (FIG. 3A), wherein the cap is removably attached to the front end portion (FIG. 3). Furthermore Nishida teaches wherein the film (50) covers at least part of the front end portion and at least part of the cap (FIG. 3), wherein at least part of the film is a breakable portion (51) where the film is breakable (FIG. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the cap and modify the film taught by Nishida in the style taught by Oh since Oh teaches that this cap and film configuration increases the likelihood that the bottle/container will be recycled (¶0004-¶0019).
Regarding claim 7, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a breakable However, this is known. Oh teaches a breakable portion is a perforated line (FIG. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the perforated line taught by Oh on the film/seal 46 taught by Nishida since Oh teaches that the perforated lines will assist with removing the label and thus increase the amount of recycling (¶0025-¶0026).
Regarding claim 8, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the breakable portion is a perforated line. However, this is known. Oh teaches the breakable portion is a perforated line (FIG. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the perforated line taught by Oh on the film/seal 46 taught by Nishida since Oh teaches that the perforated lines will assist with removing the label (¶0025-¶0026).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 7. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the details of how the film/seal 46 should be removed. Oh teaches a direction in which the storage portion and the nozzle are aligned is defined as a first direction, the film is configured to have a cylindrical shape with a first end in the first direction open and a second end opposite the first end open (FIG. 3), and wherein the breakable portion (51) extends from the first end toward the second end, wherein the film includes at least two of the breakable portions that do not intersect (FIG. 3).
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the film is composed of a film that shrinks by heat. However, heat-shrinking film is well-known. Oh teaches the film is composed of a film that shrink by heat (¶0006-¶0007). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the heat shrinking film taught by Oh as the film/seal taught by Nishida since Oh teaches there are only two methods to attach such a film, either with an adhesive or with heat shrinking. Since there are only two means of applying the film (adhesive or heat shrinking) it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to use heat shrinking film as the film/seal 46 since there are a finite number of options, a recognized need to secure packages for transport and one of ordinary skill would reasonably anticipate success by heat shrinking.
Regarding claim 15, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the film is a sheet member having a thickness greater than or equal to 0.01 mm and less than or equal to 0.30 mm. Oh teaches using a heat shrinking film to seal a bottle (¶0006-¶0007). It is well-known that heat shrink film can have a thickness greater than or equal to 0.01 mm and less than or equal to 0.30 mm. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a thickness greater than or equal to 0.01 mm and less than or equal to 0.30 mm since the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing.
Regarding claim 16 and 18, Nishida, Koguchi and Oh teach the toner container according to Claim 7. Furthermore, Nishida teaches the storage portion is a pouch (41) formed from a sheet for storing toner. Nishida differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: wherein one of outer side surfaces of the storage portion has written information, and wherein when a direction in which the storage portion and the nozzle are aligned is defined as a first direction, the breakable portion is disposed in a surface of the film on a side with the written information as viewed from the first direction. Firstly, having written information on the exterior of toner containers is well-known in the art at the time of filing. Secondly, Oh teaches when a direction in which the storage portion and the nozzle are aligned is defined as a first direction, the breakable portion is disposed in a surface of the film on a side with the written information as viewed from the first direction (FIG. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the positioning of the breakable portion taught by Oh with the device taught by Nishida since Oh teaches that increases the likelihood that the bottle/container will be recycled (¶0004-¶0019).
Regarding claim 17, Nishida, Koguchi and Oh teach the toner container according to Claim 7. Nishida, Koguchi and Oh differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the film is composed of a stretch film that is stretchable. However, this is suggested by Nishida who teaches that need for an elastic substance to provide a resilient supply container (¶0006-¶0007). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that the seal 46 taught by Nishida also be made of a “stretchable” or elastic material since Nishida teaches this allows for a more resilient structure that can accommodate different pressures (¶0005-¶0009).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida et al. US 2014/0363210 (Nishida), Koguchi et al. US 2021/0318642 A1 (Koguchi) and Ikado US 2010/0209141 A1 (Ikado).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Nishida and Koguchi teach the toner container according to Claim 1. Nishida and Koguchi differ from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a shielding member capable of shielding the discharge port. However, shielding members are known. Ikado teaches the front-end portion includes a shielding member (66) capable of shielding the discharge port of the nozzle, wherein the shielding member includes: a cylindrical portion (main body of 66) extending in a first direction in which the storage portion and the shielding member are aligned and a flange (66a) having an outer shape that is larger than an outer shape of the cylindrical portion (FIG. 5), wherein the cylindrical portion includes an end surface (64) adjacent to the shielding member in the first direction, and the end surface (64) is perpendicular to the first direction (FIG. 5). Furthermore, the flange is located closer to the storage portion than the end surface in the first direction (FIG. 5). When Nishida is modified to include the shielding member 66, the result is the film covers a surface of the flange adjacent to the storage portion in the first direction and the end surface adjacent to the shielding member in the first direction. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the shielding member 66 taught by Ikado with the device taught by Nishida since Ikado teaches that the shielding member offers the additionally capability of a slit 66b that allows for the prescribed positional relationships, i.e., allows the image forming apparatus to open and close the pouch.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JESSICA L ELEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9793. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM CST.
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, Walter Jr. Lindsay can be reached at (571)272-1674. 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.
/Jessica L Eley/Examiner, Art Unit 2852