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 filed October 15, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Firstly, applicant argues that the drum unit 26 taught by Kamimura and Hashimoto do not include the developing cartridge. This argument is not persuasive since Kamimura teaches that “The processing portion 21 includes a drum unit 26 and four developing cartridges 27, each of which corresponds to each color.” [¶0059] Hashimoto teaches “The process unit 3 includes a drum unit 9 and a plurality of (four in this embodiment) development cartridges 10. [¶0031] Which is identical to how applicant describes the process unit, “The process unit U includes a drum unit 50, and four toner cartridges TC.” [¶0026] This argument is a distinction without a difference as noted above, and thus not persuasive.
Secondly, applicant argues that Hashimoto fails to disclose the second part of two part toner, i.e., the magnetic carrier equating this fact as indicating that the roller 13 taught by Hashimoto is quiet with regards to the specifics of the development roller. However the priority documents (see the attached copy and translation of JP 2015-074251 or JP 6409661 B2), state the following “the supply roller 14 supplies the toner in the developing cartridge 10 to the developing roller 13. At this time, the toner is frictionally charged to the positive polarity between the developing roller 13 and the supply roller 14, and is carried on the developing roller 13.” Thus the developing roller 13 taught by Hashimoto does anticipate the claim of a magnetic developing roller.
Finally applicant argues Kamimura fails to teach the side wall being made of metal since Kamimura also teaches an inner wall made of resin. This argument is not persuasive since. The teaching of Kamimura was to show that it is known to make the side walls of either material, Kamimuar teaches “[0129] Each of the pair of side plates 103 may be formed of a material with a higher rigidity than the resin material that forms each of the drum subunits 28, front beam 101, and rear beam 102. The material of the metal with the higher rigidity may be, for example, metal or glass fiber reinforced resin, and/or preferably, a steel plate.” Thus Kamimura is being used to teach modifying the plate taught by Hashimoto, as thus the argument is not persuasive.
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 2-7 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto et al. US 2016/0291527 A1 (Hashimoto) and Kamimura US 2007/0147889 A1 (Kamimura).
Regarding claim 2, Hashimoto teaches a drum unit comprising:
a first photosensitive drum (11) rotatable about a first axis extending in a first direction (FIG. 2);
a second photosensitive drum (11) rotatable about a second axis extending in the first direction;
a developing unit comprising:
a magnetic roller (13) rotatable about a third axis extending in the first direction, the magnetic roller facing a surface of the first photosensitive drum (¶0035-¶0036);
a developer container (10) configured to accommodate carrier; and
a first side wall (plate 28) positioned at one end of the first photosensitive drum in the first direction, the first side wall supporting the developing unit and both of the first photosensitive drum and the second photosensitive drum, (FIG. 2-4); and
a developing unit comprising:
Hashimoto differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the first side wall being made of metal. However, it is well known for frame plates to be made of metal or resin. Kamimura teaches the first side wall being made of metal (¶0129). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the plate 28 taught by Hashimoto out of metal as taught Kamimura since Kamimura teaches that it is known to make the material out of metal or resin (¶0129).
Regarding claim 3, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 2. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches a second side wall (29) positioned at the another end of the first photosensitive drum in the first direction (FIG. 9), the second side wall (29) supporting both of the first photosensitive drum and the second photosensitive drum.
Hashimoto differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the second side wall being made of metal. However, it is well known for frame plates to be made of metal or resin. Kamimura teaches the first side wall being made of metal (¶0129). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the plate 29 taught by Hashimoto out of metal as taught Kamimura since Kamimura teaches that it is known to make the material out of metal or resin (¶0129).
Regarding claim 4, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 2. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches a first resin wall (34) being positioned at the one end of the first photosensitive drum;
a second resin wall (35) being positioned at another end of the first photosensitive drum, and
wherein the first side wall (28) and the first photosensitive drum are positioned between the first resin wall and the second resin wall in the first direction (FIG. 2).
Hashimoto differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: the first resin wall being made of resin and the second resin wall being made of resin. However, it is well known for frame plates to be made of metal or resin. Kamimura teaches the first side plate and second side plate being made of metal (¶0129). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the plates 34 AND 35 taught by Hashimoto out of metal as taught Kamimura since Kamimura teaches that it is known to make the material out of metal or resin (¶0129).
Regarding claim 5, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 3. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches the first side wall further supports the developing unit (FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 6 Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 4. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches a second developing unit comprising:
a second magnetic roller (13) rotatable about a fourth axis extending in the first direction, the second magnetic roller facing a surface of the second photosensitive drum (¶0035-¶0036); and
a second developer container (10) configured to accommodate carrier, wherein the first side wall further supports the second developing unit (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 2. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches the developer container has an inlet allowing toner to be replenished (¶0035-¶0037).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 5. Hashimoto differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: how the developer unit fits into the sidewall configuration. Kamimura teaches the first side wall (29) is formed with a first hole (106) allowing one end portion in the first direction of the developing unit to be inserted into the first hole (¶0119), so that the one end portion is supported by the first side wall. Kamimura also teaches a cylindrical member (51), wherein the second side wall (29) is formed with a second hole (106); and wherein the cylindrical member is inserted into the second hole, the cylindrical member has an opening in which another end portion in the first direction of the developing unit is inserted (¶0119). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the arrangement for supporting the developing member with the sidewalls strategy taught by Kamimura with the device taught by Hashimoto since Hasimoto is silent with regards to how the developing unit fits in the image forming apparatus, leaving it to one of ordinary skill to pursue the known options within his or her grasp of which the configuration taught by Kamimura.
Regarding claim 17, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 2. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches the drum unit further comprises: a charger (12) configured to charge the first photosensitive drum.
Regarding claim 18, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 17. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches the charger is a scorotron charger (¶0032).
Regarding claim 19, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 2. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches the drum unit further comprises: a sheet guide configured to guide a sheet toward the first photosensitive drum (0157).
Regarding claim 20, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 2. Furthermore, Hashimoto teaches the drum unit further comprises: a cleaning roller (30) configured to perform cleaning on the first photosensitive drum (¶0077).
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto et al. US 2016/0291527 A1 (Hashimoto), Kamimura US 2007/0147889 A1 (Kamimura) and Matsushima et al. US 10,048,619 B1 (Matsushima).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Hashimoto and Kamimura teach the drum unit according to claim 7. Hoshimoto and Kamimura differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: a first auger and second auger. However, this is a well-known configuration. Matsushima teaches a first auger (68) positioned in the developer container and rotatable about a fourth axis extending in the first direction (FIG. 3), the first auger being configured to circulate the toner and the carrier in the developer container (FIG. 3); and
a second auger (66) positioned in the developer container and rotatable about a fifth axis extending in the first direction, the second auger being configured to convey the toner and the carrier to the magnetic roller (FIG. 3),
wherein the inlet is positioned opposite to the magnetic roller (60) with respect to the first auger and the second auger (C8 L15-25). Furthermore, Matsushima teaches the inlet is positioned above the first auger and the second auger (FIG. 3); and wherein the third axis is positioned below the first auger and the second auger (FIG. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the development apparatus taught by Hoshimoto and Kamimura to use the configuration taught by Matsushima since the configuration taught Matsushima offer the advantage of preventing streaks and auger marks from appearing in the image (Matsushima C1 L37-44).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Hashimoto, Kamimura and Matsushima (HKM) teach the drum unit according to claim 9. Furthermore, Kamimura teaches a layer thickness regulation member (53&54) configured to regulate a thickness of a toner layer formed on the magnetic roller, the layer thickness regulation member being out of contact with the magnetic roller (¶0081-¶0082). In the combination of adding the doctor blade taught by Kamimura to the modified device taught by HKM the result would be the layer thickness regulation member is positioned below the first auger and the second auger. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the doctor blade taught by Kamimura since doctor blades are well-known in the art at doing so would yield the predictable result of an even layer of developer being deposited on the developing roller.
Regarding claims 12-14, HKM teach teaches the drum unit according to claim 8. Furthermore, Matsushima teaches the first auger (68) is configured to convey the toner replenished from the inlet to the second auger (66, C4 L37-44);
wherein the second auger (66) is configured to supply the toner conveyed by the first auger to the magnetic roller (60, C4 L37-44); and
wherein the magnetic roller (60) is configured to supply the toner supplied from the second auger to the first photosensitive drum (FIG. 3). Furthermore, Matshushima teaches the first auger (69) is positioned closer to the inlet than the second auger (66) is to the inlet (FIG. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the development apparatus taught by Hoshimoto and Kamimura to use the configuration taught by Matsushima since the configuration taught Matsushima offer the advantage of preventing streaks and auger marks from appearing in the image (Matsushima C1 L37-44).
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