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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: typographical error/clarity of phrasing. Claim 23 states “the support unit of the storage unit”. The support unit is defined in the independent claim 1 as supporting a channel and does not state supporting the storage unit nor do any relevant dependent claims state this feature. Therefore, in order to expedite prosecution, the Examiner is assuming Applicant is intending to reference the support unit from Claim 1 which could be referred to as the support unit of the channel, given this is the element with which Applicant has antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner notes Applicant’s amendment to claim 2 to overcome the objection stated in the non-final rejection (dated February 10, 2026). Based on this amendment, the objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1, and all relevant dependent claims therein, have been considered but, because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Shihoh et al. (US6082851), Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 (e.g., regarding the applicability of Shihoh; regarding its ability to be combined with additional prior art) are moot. Moreover, any arguments regarding dependent claims that relied upon claim 1 are also now moot for the same reason.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1, 5, 7-9, 12, & 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momose (US 20150210083 A1) in view of Murray et al. (US 5686947 A; herein referred to as “Murray”).
With respect to Claim 1, Momose teaches a printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) that performs printing by ejecting liquid to a print medium (i.e., ejecting ink onto “P”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1), the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) comprising:
a printing unit configured to eject the liquid (i.e., “recording head 20” ejecting ink [also seemingly erroneously referenced as “recording head 12” in certain parts of Momose’s disclosure]; Momose: ¶0034-0035 & 0052 & Fig. 1-2);
a storage unit configured to store the liquid (i.e., “27” containing ink; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7);
a housing defining an interior of the printing apparatus (i.e., “12A” defines interior of apparatus “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1);
a moving unit on which the storage unit is placed in a replaceable manner, and that is configured to be movable between a replacement position, outside the housing, where the storage unit can be replaced, and a retracted position, inside the housing (i.e., “26”, can be inserted into, and extracted from, housing “12A” and the storage unit “27” is placed in an attachable/detachable manner to “26”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7); and
a support unit (i.e., “62” and “65” which support and contain channel “21a”; Momose: ¶0048 & annotated Fig. 2 below) configured to support a channel connected to the storage unit (i.e., channel “21a” is connected to storage unit “27”; Momose: ¶0047; see annotated Fig. 2 below; Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
751
1120
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Momose is silent on a support unit configured to support a channel connected to the storage unit and configured to be deformable in accordance with movement of the moving unit.
Murray teaches a support unit (i.e., “bendable conduit router 60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6) configured to support a channel (i.e., “plastic conduits 38”; Murray: col 5, l 32-49; Fig. 6) connected to the storage unit (i.e., “high volume ink reservoir 36”; Murray: col. 5, l. 32-49 & Fig. 6) and configured to be deformable in accordance with movement of the moving unit (i.e., “bendable conduit router 60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 below). Note that Murray modifies Momose by further encasing Momose’s channel “21a” in the deformable support unit “60” taught by Murray. Murray teaches that the support unit “60” can encase channels which communicate with print units “26” and moreover, that these channels have movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 below). Murray teaches a support unit “60” that can deform in tandem with the bending of these moving channels (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
477
655
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose by further encasing Momose’s channel “21a” in the deformable support unit “60” taught by Murray. Murray’s support unit “60” can protectively encase a channel and moreover, can do so despite the channel having movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 above). Murray teaches a support unit “60” that can deform in tandem with the bending of these moving channels (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 above). This protection of the channel enables it to “smoothly feed” liquid within the channel even while the channel is being moved by other elements of the apparatus (Murray: col. 8, l. 40-61).
With respect to Claim 5, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 1,
wherein the storage unit stores the liquid to be ejected to the print medium (i.e., “27” contains ink that will be ejected by “20”/“12” onto medium “P”; Momose: ¶0035,¶0033, Fig. 2), and
wherein the liquid stored in the storage unit is supplied via the channel to the printing unit (i.e., “27” contains ink that is supplied via channel “21a” to printing unit “20”/“12”; Momose: ¶0034-0035, ¶0047, & Fig. 2).
With respect to Claim 7, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 1,
wherein the storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7) includes a first storage unit configured to store a first liquid and a second storage unit configured to store a second liquid (i.e., “a plurality of liquid container 27”, wherein each can contain different liquids; Momose: ¶0053 & Fig. 2). Note that, given there can be more than one storage unit, for clarity the examiner will refer to one storage unit and its stored liquid as the first storage unit and the first liquid, and the other will be referred to as the second storage unit and the second liquid.
and wherein, in the movement direction, the first storage unit and the second storage unit are arranged side by side in a direction intersecting with the movement direction of the moving unit (i.e., storage units “27” are arranged in a left-right direction, which intersects with the front-back movement direction).
With respect to Claim 8, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 7,
wherein, between the first storage unit and the second storage unit (i.e., “a plurality of liquid container 27”, wherein each can contain different liquids; Momose: ¶0053 & Fig. 2)
a first channel connected to the first storage unit and a second channel connected to the second storage unit (i.e., “a plurality of the ink feeding tubes 21a”, with each connected to a corresponding storage unit “27”; Momose: ¶0054 & Fig. 2).
Momose is silent on wherein, between the first storage unit and the second storage unit, the support unit supports a first channel connected to the first storage unit and a second channel connected to the second storage unit.
Murray teaches wherein, between the first storage unit and the second storage unit, the support unit (i.e., “60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6) supports a first channel connected to the first storage unit and a second channel connected to the second storage unit (i.e., multiple channels “38” are contained with the support unit “36”; Murray: col 5, l 32-49; Fig. 6). Note that Murray modifies Momose by further encasing Momose’s channels “21a” in the deformable support unit “60” taught by Murray. The channels “21a” are each connected to a corresponding storage unit “27 (Momose: ¶0054 & Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose by further encasing multiple Momose’s channels “21a” in the deformable support unit “60” taught by Murray. Murray’s support unit “60” can protectively encase these channels and moreover, can do so despite the channels having movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6). Murray teaches a support unit “60” that can deform in tandem with the bending of these moving channels (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6). This protection of the channels enables it to “smoothly feed” liquid within the channel even while the channel is being moved by other elements of the apparatus (Murray: col. 8, l. 40-61). Therefore, liquid from the storage units “27” can be smoothly fed to their corresponding printing units.
With respect to Claim 9, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 7, wherein
a first channel connected to the first storage unit; and a second channel connected to the second storage unit (i.e., “a plurality of the ink feeding tubes 21a”, with each connected to a corresponding storage unit “27”; Momose: ¶0054 & Fig. 2).
Momose is silent on wherein the support unit includes:
a first support unit configured to support a first channel connected to the first storage unit; and
a second support unit configured to support a second channel connected to the second storage unit.
Murray teaches on wherein the support unit includes:
a first support unit (i.e., “60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6) configured to support a first channel connected to the first storage unit (i.e., a channel “38” is contained within the support unit “36”; Murray: col 5, l 32-49; Fig. 6); and
a second support unit (i.e., “60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6) configured to support a second channel connected to the second storage unit (i.e., a channel “38” is contained within the support unit “36”; Murray: col 5, l 32-49; Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose by further encasing Momose’s first channel “21a” in a deformable support unit “60” taught by Murray. Similarly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose by encasing Momose’s second channel “21a” in a deformable support unit “60” taught by Murray. Murray’s support unit “60” can protectively encase a channel and moreover, can do so despite the channel having movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6). Murray teaches a support unit “60” that can deform in tandem with the bending of a moving channel (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6). Therefore, protecting a channel (i.e., the first channel and the second channel) each within a support unit “60” taught by Murray, enables each channel to “smoothly feed” liquid within the channel even while the channel is being moved by other elements of the apparatus (Murray: col. 8, l. 40-61).
With respect to Claim 12, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein, in the replacement position, the storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7) does not overlap with an outer casing of the printing unit in the movement direction of the moving unit (i.e., storage unit “27” is dimensionally smaller in all directions than “26” so as to be contained therein within the overall apparatus, and therefore does not overlap with the external casing “12A” in the back-front direction when in the replacement or retracted positions, as shown in Fig. 1; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 1-2).
With respect to Claim 18, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 1.
Momose is silent on wherein the support unit includes:
a fixing part that extends in a movement direction of the moving unit and is fixed to the printing apparatus; and
a deformable part of which one end is connected to the fixing part and the other end is fixed to the moving unit,
the deformable part being configured to extend from one side to the other side of the movement direction and then to curve at a predetermined curvature and to fold from the other side to the one side, so as to extend in an overlapping manner with the fixing part in a direction of gravity.
Murray teaches wherein the support unit (i.e., “bendable conduit router 60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6) includes:
a fixing part that extends in a movement direction of the moving unit and is fixed to the printing apparatus (i.e., “support structure 20”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61, see annotated Murray Fig. 6 below & annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Note that the support unit is within the modified apparatus taught by Momose modified by Murray and, given the apparatus has narrow structure encasing the channel “21a”, the support unit would have its fixing part affixed against part of that printing apparatus structure currently encasing channel “21a” as taught in Momose’s Fig. 2 (see annotated Momose Fig. 2).
a deformable part of which one end is connected to the fixing part and the other end is fixed to the moving unit (i.e., “bendable conduit router 60” that is affixed on one end to a wall portion of the printing apparatus and the other end affixed to a moveable part of the apparatus; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61, see annotated Murray Fig. 6 below & annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Murray teaches “the other end of the Igus chain 60 is fixed to the print carriage” (Murray: col. 8, l.40-61 & see annotated Murray Fig. 6 below), teaching that the other end of the deformable part is attached to a movable part of the printer. As discussed above, the apparatus taught by Momose modified by Murray has a moving unit to which Murray’s deformable part can be affixed (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Note that the support unit is within the modified apparatus taught by Momose modified by Murray and the other end of the deformable part is in contact with part of the moving unit (i.e., part of the moving unit’s structure that is encasing channel “21a”; see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below).
the deformable part being configured to extend from one side to the other side of the movement direction and then to curve at a predetermined curvature and to fold from the other side to the one side, so as to extend in an overlapping manner with the fixing part in a direction of gravity (“60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Murray Fig. 6 below & see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Note that, due to the direction of the channels taught by Momose, the orientation of Murray’s deformable part are overlapping as claimed in the limitation (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
477
655
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
432
1392
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support unit taught by Momose modified by Murray to include a fixing part and a deformable part with the limitations claimed. Modifying the support unit so that it contains a fixing part extending in the movement direction and affixed to the printing apparatus is beneficial so as to align with the direction of the channel and to avoid the support unit from being displaced during the movement of the channel. Modifying the support unit so that it contains a deformable part with the limitations claimed above is beneficial so that the support unit can deform around the curved portion of channel while still completely encasing the channel and not becoming detached from the fixing part of the support unit.
With respect to Claim 19, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 18, wherein,
in the retracted position (i.e., “26”, can be inserted into, and extracted from, housing “12A” and the storage unit “27” is placed in an attachable/detachable manner to “26”; Momose: ¶0035; see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below, which depicts moving unit “26” in the retracted position)
Momose is silent on wherein, in the retracted position, the fixing part is located directly above the moving unit in the direction of gravity.
Murray teaches wherein, in the retracted position, the fixing part is located directly above the moving unit in the direction of gravity (i.e., “support structure 20”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6; see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Note that the support unit is within the modified apparatus taught by Momose modified by Murray and, given the apparatus has narrow structure encasing the channel “21a”, the support unit would have its fixing part affixed against part of that printing apparatus structure currently encasing channel “21a” as taught in Momose’s Fig. 2 (see annotated Momose Fig. 2). In the modified apparatus, the fixing part is affixed to the upper part of that structure. That upper part is above the bottom part of Momose modified by Murray’s moving unit “26” (see annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
432
1392
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixing part taught by Momose modified by Murray by locating it directly above the moving unit in the direction of gravity. Doing so enables the fixing part to not impede the positioning of Momose’s curved channel “21” (see annotated Momose Fig. 2), because the angle of curvature of the channel precludes it from touching an upper part of the structure encasing the channel “21a”.
With respect to Claim 20, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 18.
Momose is silent on wherein the deformable part is configured to internally accommodate the channel and to surround the channel along a linear portion extending along the movement direction and along a curved portion.
Murray teaches wherein the deformable part (i.e., “bendable conduit router 60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61, see annotated Murray Fig. 6 below & annotated Momose Fig. 2 below) is configured to internally accommodate the channel and to surround the channel along a linear portion extending along the movement direction and along a curved portion (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 below & annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Note that the support unit is within the modified apparatus taught by Momose modified by Murray, wherein the support unit is encasing Momose’s channel “21a” rather than Murray’s channel “38”.
PNG
media_image3.png
477
655
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
432
1392
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the deformable part taught by Momose modified by Murray to internally accommodate the channel both along the claimed linear portion and along the claimed curved portion, given this provides more protection to the channel “21a” which has both linear and curved portions of the channel (as shown in Momose Fig. 2).
With respect to Claim 21, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 18.
Momose is silent on wherein the deformable part is configured with unit components linked with pins.
Murray teaches wherein the deformable part is configured with unit components linked with pins (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
465
655
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s apparatus to include a deformable part configured with unit components linked with pins. As taught by Murray, this configuration enables a structure that can protectively encase tubing containing printing-related liquids encasing while, simultaneously, enabling that structure to be deformable so as to accommodate channels having movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 above). This deformable yet protective encasing of the channel enables the deformable part to ensure liquid is “smoothly” fed within the channel even while the channel is being moved by other elements of the apparatus (Murray: col. 8, l. 40-61).
With respect to Claim 22, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 18, wherein, in the storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7), a connection member (“61”; Momose: ¶0046-0047, ¶0058, & see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below) that can be connected to the channel (i.e., channel “21a”; Momose: ¶0047; see annotated Fig. 2 below; Fig. 7) is located on one side of the movement direction (i.e., see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image7.png
444
929
media_image7.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 23, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 22, wherein
the connection member (“61”; Momose: ¶0046-0047, ¶0058, & see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below)
the storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7).
Momose is silent on wherein the connection member is located on a side where the support unit of the storage unit is located (see Claim Objections section).
Murray teaches wherein the connection member is located on a side where the support unit (i.e., “bendable conduit router 60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6) of the storage unit is located (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below; also see Claim Objections section). As is shown in annotated Momose Fig. 2 (see below), Momose’s connection member “61” is located on a side where Murray’s support unit “60” is also located. As stated in the Claim Objections section, in order to expedite prosecution, the Examiner is assuming Applicant intended to reference the support unit claimed in claim 1, which supports a channel, given this is the element with which Applicant has antecedent basis.
PNG
media_image7.png
444
929
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s connection member to be located on a side where the support unit of the channel is located given Momose teaches the connection member is connected to the channel so liquid can flow from the storage unit into the channel (“61”; Momose: ¶0046-0047, ¶0058, & see annotated Momose Fig. 2 above) and the support unit is encasing this channel (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6; see annotated Momose Fig. 2 above).
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momose in view of Murray and further in view of Takada et al. (US 20100060701 A1; herein referred to as “Takada”).
With respect to Claim 6, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein
the storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7)
the printing unit (i.e., “20”/“12”; Momose: ¶0034-0035, ¶0047, & annotated Fig. 2 above), and
Momose is silent on wherein
the storage unit stores waste liquid generated in a recovery operation performed for the printing unit, and
the waste liquid is transported to the storage unit via the channel.
Takada teaches wherein
the storage unit stores waste liquid generated in a recovery operation performed for the printing unit (i.e., “80” storing waste liquid from apparatus’s “liquid ejection head 30”; Takada: ¶0027, ¶0029, & Fig. 1), and
the waste liquid is transported to the storage unit via the channel (i.e., “waste-liquid recovery channel” transports waste liquid to storage unit “80”; Takada: ¶0028; see Takada Fig. 1, element “3100”).
Note that Takada modifies Momose’s apparatus and storage unit “27” (which stores liquid to be fed to Momose’s printing unit “20”) to be configured as taught by Takada so as to store waste liquid from the printing unit.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s storage unit to have the limitations above using the teachings of Takada, because this enables a user to recover waste liquid from the apparatus. Moreover, Takada teaches the waste-recovery using a channel is less prone to leakage of ink (Takada: ¶0014).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momose in view of Murray and further in view of Kubota et al. (US 20090315937 A1; herein referred to as “Kubota”).
With respect to Claim 10, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 7, wherein the printing unit (i.e., “20”/“12”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 1-2) includes:
a first printing unit configured to eject the first liquid; and a second printing unit configured to eject the second liquid (i.e., “a plurality of nozzle rows” wherein one row can eject the first liquid and another row can eject the second liquid; Momose: ¶0034 & Fig. 1-2). The nozzle row configured to eject the first liquid can be referred to as the first printing unit and the nozzle row configured to eject the second liquid can be referred to as the second printing unit.
wherein the first liquid is ink to be supplied to the first printing unit (Momose: ¶0034 & ¶0053), and
the second liquid is supplied to the second printing unit (i.e., each of the plurality of printing units taught by Momose are connected via a channel “21a” to supply liquid to its respective printing unit; Momose: ¶0034, ¶0053, & Fig. 2; also see Momose’s Fig. 2 which representatively shows one of the storage units containing liquid being connected to one the printing units wherein liquid is supplied to that printing unit).
Momose is silent on the second liquid is reaction liquid that reacts with the ink and is supplied to the second printing unit.
Kubota teaches the second liquid is reaction liquid that reacts with the ink and is supplied to the second printing unit (Kubota: 0037 & 0041; Fig. 1, elements “116S”, “117S”, & “115S”). Note that Kubota teaches a plurality of printing units connected to storage units storing liquids (e.g., reaction liquid, ink). Momose’s second liquid ejected by Momose’s second printing unit “20” is modified by Kubota to be the reaction liquid taught by Kubota.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s printing unit, and its second liquid in particular, to be the reaction liquid taught by Kubota, because Kubota teaches that this reaction liquid “contains a reactant that breaks the dispersed state of the colorant and the like in the ink composition, thereby agglomerating the colorant component and the like” (Kubota: ¶0041).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momose in view of Murray and further in view of Kubota as well as Takada.
With respect to Claim 11, Momose teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 7, wherein the printing unit (i.e., “20”/”12”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 1-2) includes:
a first printing unit configured to eject ink; and a second printing unit configured to eject (i.e., “a plurality of nozzle rows” wherein one row can eject the first liquid and another row can eject the second liquid; Momose: ¶0034 & Fig. 1-2). The nozzle row configured to eject the first liquid can be referred to as the first printing unit and the nozzle row configured to eject the second liquid can be referred to as the second printing unit.
Momose is silent on wherein
a second printing unit configured to eject reaction liquid that reacts with the ink,
wherein the first liquid includes waste ink generated in a recovery operation performed for the first printing unit, and
the second liquid includes waste reaction liquid generated in a recovery operation performed for the second printing unit.
Kubota teaches wherein
a second printing unit (i.e., “20”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 1-2) configured to eject reaction liquid that reacts with the ink (Kubota: 0037 & 0041; Fig. 1, elements “116S”, “117S”, & “115S”). Note that Kubota teaches a plurality of printing units connected to storage units storing liquids (e.g., reaction liquid, ink). Momose’s second liquid associated with Momose’s second printing unit “20” ejected by Kubota to be the reaction liquid taught by Kubota.
Takada teaches wherein
the first liquid includes waste ink generated in a recovery operation performed for the first printing unit (i.e., waste liquid from apparatus’s “liquid ejection head 30”, ultimately stored in storage unit “80”; Takada: ¶0027, ¶0029, & Fig. 1). Note that Takada teaches a liquid that is fed to the printing unit also has a waste stream associated with that liquid coming from that printing unit. Takada modifies Momose’s apparatus and the first liquid therein, which is an ink, to include the waste ink as taught by Takada.
the second liquid includes waste reaction liquid generated in a recovery operation performed for the second printing unit (i.e., waste liquid from apparatus’s “liquid ejection head 30”, ultimately stored in storage unit “80”; Takada: ¶0027, ¶0029, & Fig. 1). Note that Takada teaches a liquid that is fed to the printing unit also has a waste stream associated with that liquid coming from that printing unit. Takada modifies Momose’s apparatus and the second liquid therein, which is a reaction liquid, to include the waste reaction liquid as taught by Takada.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s printing unit, and its second liquid in particular, to be the reaction liquid taught by Kubota, because Kubota teaches that this reaction liquid “contains a reactant that breaks the dispersed state of the colorant and the like in the ink composition, thereby agglomerating the colorant component and the like” (Kubota: ¶0041).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Momose modified by Kubota, and the first and second liquids therein, using the teachings of Takada, because this enables a user to recover waste liquids associated with two liquid used within the apparatus.
Claims 13-17 & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momose in view of Murray and further in view of Kawate et al. (US 20180043695 A1; herein referred to as “Kawate”).
With respect to Claim 13, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 1. Note that Momose teaches the apparatus comprises a storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7).
Momose is silent on wherein the storage unit includes a grip part that can be gripped.
Kawate teaches wherein the storage unit includes a grip part that can be gripped (i.e., storage unit “100” includes a “170” grip part that can be gripped; Kawate: ¶0207 & Fig. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s storage unit “27” to include a grip part that can be gripped to enable a user to more easily remove the storage unit “27” from the apparatus when it is time to be replaced.
With respect to Claim 14, Momose teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 13, wherein
storage unit (i.e., “27”; Momose: ¶0035 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 7).
Momose is silent on wherein the grip part is a notch part formed by notching a part of a side surface and lower surface of the storage unit.
Kawate teaches wherein the grip part (i.e., storage unit “100” includes a “170” grip part that can be gripped; Kawate: ¶0207 & Fig. 13) is a notch part formed by notching a part of a side surface and lower surface of the storage unit (see annotated Kawate Fig. 1 below). Note that Kawate teaches two features. Firstly, Kawate teaches that Momose’s storage unit can be modified to include a grip part (Kawate: ¶0207 & Fig. 13). Secondly, Kawate teaches that storage units can have a notch that can be used to grip these storage units. As shown in Kawate’s annotated Fig. 1 below, Kawate teaches that a printing apparatus, which stores liquid, can be shaped rectangularly and have a notch formed by notching a part of a side surface and lower surface of the storage unit. A user can grip this notch. Therefore, as taught by Kawate, Momose’s storage unit “27” can be a rectangularly-shaped storage unit with a notch that can be gripped by a user.
PNG
media_image8.png
304
622
media_image8.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s storage unit “27” to include is a notch part formed by notching a part of a side surface and lower surface of the storage unit as a rectangular storage unit would utilize more volume of ink storage within Momose’s modified rectangular moving unit “26” compared to a bag form and the notch part would enable a user grip a rectangular modified storage unit “27” and more easily remove the storage unit from the apparatus when it is time to be replaced.
With respect to Claim 15, the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 14, wherein,
in the replacement position (i.e., “26”, can be inserted into, and extracted from, housing “12A” and the storage unit “27” is placed in an attachable/detachable manner to “26”; Momose: ¶0035; Fig. 2 & Fig. 7)
movement direction of the moving unit (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below)
Momose is silent on wherein, in the replacement position, the grip part does not overlap with the support unit in the movement direction of the moving unit.
Murray teaches the support unit (i.e., “60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6).
Kawate teaches wherein, in the replacement position, the grip part (i.e., grip part “170” which can be configured as a notch of the type shown in annotated Kawate Fig. 1 above; Kawate: ¶0207 & Fig. 13) does not overlap with the support unit in the movement direction of the moving unit (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Note that, given the positioning of the channel “21a” at the front of the movement direction, there is not space at the front in the movement direction wherein to place a notch (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below). Therefore, the notch would be placed on the right or left of the modified storage unit “44” and, subsequently, would not overlap with the support unit in the movement direction when in the replacement position (see annotated Momose Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
350
734
media_image9.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose by further encasing Momose’s channel “21a” in the support unit “60” taught by Murray. Murray’s support unit “60” can protectively encase a channel and moreover, can do so despite the channel having movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 above). This protection of the channel enables it to “smoothly feed” liquid within the channel even while the channel is being moved by other elements of the apparatus (Murray: col. 8, l. 40-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose’s storage unit “27” to include is a notch part within Momose’s modified rectangular moving unit “26” on a side wherein, in the replacement position, the grip part does not overlap with the support unit in the movement direction. Given the positioning of the channel “21a” at the front of the movement direction, the notch being placed on the right or left of the modified storage unit “44” is utilizing space not already occupied by channel “21a” and the support unit encasing it (i.e., space is already taken in the movement direction, so there is no place to put the notch without disrupting the channel “21a”, and therefore placing the notch on the right or left is the more viable option).
With respect to Claim 16, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 13.
Momose is silent on wherein the grip part is a handle part installed upright on an upper surface of the storage unit.
Kawate teaches wherein the grip part is a handle part installed upright on an upper surface of the storage unit (i.e., storage unit “100” includes a “170” handle on the upper surface of the storage unit that is installed upright; Kawate: ¶0207, ¶0209, & ¶0328, Fig. 13, & Fig. 35-36). Note that the handle is installed with the ability to pivot (Kawate: ¶0209 & Fig. 36) and therefore the installed handle can be angled at many orientations, including upright.
With respect to Claim 17, Momose modified by Murray teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 13.
Momose is silent on wherein the grip part is a handhold part installed on an upper surface of the storage unit for hooking a hand for carrying the storage unit.
Kawate teaches wherein the grip part is a handhold part installed on an upper surface of the storage unit for hooking a hand for carrying the storage unit (i.e., storage unit “100” includes a “170” handhold part on the upper surface of the storage unit that is installed upright; Kawate: ¶0207, ¶0211 & Fig. 13). Note that, as shown in Kawate Fig. 13, the handhold part has an opening in which a user can hook their hand in order to move the storage unit (Kawate: ¶0207, ¶0211 & Fig. 13).
With respect to Claim 24, Momose modified by Murray, further modified by Kawate, teaches the printing apparatus (i.e., “11”; Momose: ¶0032 & Fig. 1) according to claim 13, wherein,
in the replacement position (i.e., “26”, can be inserted into, and extracted from, housing “12A” and the storage unit “27” is placed in an attachable/detachable manner to “26”; Momose: ¶0035; Fig. 2 & Fig. 7)
Momose is silent on wherein, in the replacement position, the support unit is positioned on a rear side relative to the grip part in the movement position.
Murray teaches the support unit (i.e., “60”; Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & Fig. 6).
Kawate teaches wherein, in the replacement position, the support unit is positioned on a rear side relative to the grip part in the movement position (i.e., “170” handle on the upper surface of the storage unit; Kawate: ¶0207, ¶0209, & ¶0328, Fig. 13, & Fig. 35-36). As the moving unit “26” as taught by Momose modified by Murray is pulled out of the housing (aka the replacement position), this handle will be moving in the “front” direction, extending beyond the support unit which will therefore be positioned to the rear.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Momose by further encasing Momose’s channel “21a” in the support unit “60” taught by Murray. Murray’s support unit “60” can protectively encase a channel and moreover, can do so despite the channel having movement (Murray: col. 8, l.24-61 & see annotated Fig. 6 above). This protection of the channel enables it to “smoothly feed” liquid within the channel even while the channel is being moved by other elements of the apparatus (Murray: col. 8, l. 40-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support unit taught by Momose modified by Murray to be positioned in the claimed limitations, given the grip part is the feature a user needs access to when moving the apparatus into the replacement position and therefore should be closer to the user while the support unit, and the channel therein, should be moved farther away from the user so that it is less likely to be accidentally displaced/damaged while the user is removing the storage unit for replacement.
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 SHLOMIT CHELST whose telephone number is (571)272-0832. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 8:30 am to 5:00 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 telephone number 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/SHLOMIT CHELST/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/ Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights