DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 25 July 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statement has been considered by the Examiner.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the Examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the Examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 & 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HATANO et al. (US 2017/0057236 A1) in view of Hirashima et al. (US 6,817,699 B2) and further in view of Silverbrook (US 7,258,435 B2).
As related to independent claims 1 & 8 HATANO et al. teaches a liquid discharge apparatus comprising: a liquid discharge head configured to discharge the liquid onto a recording medium; a conveyance unit configured to convey the recording medium [claim 8] (HATANO et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 53 and Figure 1, shown below); and a liquid supply apparatus [claims 1 & 8] comprising: a tray (HATANO et al. – Figures 3B & 4-2, Reference #1 & #1a, shown below) configured to accommodate a liquid container provided with a supply port for supplying liquid to a liquid discharge head (HATANO et al. – Page 6, Paragraphs 64-65 & 71 and Figures 3A, 3B, & 4-2, Reference #112, #113, & #110, #11g, & #41, shown below); and a tray holding portion provided with a connection portion to be connected with the supply port and configured to hold the tray, wherein in a case where the supply port is connected with the connection portion (HATANO et al. – Page 4, Paragraph 55 and Figures 2 & 7, Reference #108 & #2, shown below), the liquid can be supplied to the liquid discharge head (HATANO et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 53 and Page 4, Paragraphs 55-58), wherein the tray is movable between a first position where the supply port of the liquid container accommodated in the tray and the connection portion are connected and a second position where the supply port of the liquid container accommodated in the tray and the connection portion are not connected (HATANO et al. – Page 4, Paragraphs 55-58).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
424
542
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
624
426
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
336
624
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
400
596
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Continuing with claims 1 & 8 HATANO et al. does not specifically teach the tray rotates when it slides in a first direction. However, Hirashima et al. teaches a liquid supply apparatus having a tray configured to accommodate a liquid container (Hirashima et al. – Figure 1, Reference #8 & #19, shown below) and specifically teaches the tray sliding in a first direction from a first position to a second position (Hirashima et al. – Figures 4 & 3, shown below). Meanwhile, Silverbrook teaches a liquid supply apparatus having a tray configured to accommodate a liquid container (Silverbrook – Figure 8, Reference #627 & #608, shown below) and further specifically teaches the tray rotates downward in a gravitational direction with respect to the tray holding portion when the tray slides and moves a predetermined distance or more in a first direction from the first position toward the second position (Silverbrook – Figure 8, Reference #608, shown below).
PNG
media_image6.png
377
384
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
295
346
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
332
294
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
473
464
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 the tray of HATANO et al. to slide from a first position to a second position while accommodating the liquid container thereon as taught by Hirashima et al. and further modify the tray to rotate downward in a gravitational direction as taught by Silverbrook in an effort to provide a tray configured to accommodate a liquid container which provides a consumable [i.e. ink cartridge] being replaceably mounted in a printer and the tray being movably provided for detachably storing the ink cartridge while accommodating all the major components and avoid kinking of supply hoses (Hirashima et al. – Column 1, Lines 49-56 and Silverbrook – Column 5, Lines 10-14 & Column 6, Lines 10-20).
As related to dependent claim 2, the combination of HATANO et al., Hirashima et al., and Silverbrook remains as applied above and continues to teach the liquid container is accommodated in the tray via an opening portion of the tray, and wherein in a case where the tray rotates with respect to the tray holding portion, the tray inclines so that the opening portion turns to the first direction (Hirashima – Figure 1 and Silverbrook Figure 8, both shown above).
As related to dependent claim 3, the combination of HATANO et al., Hirashima et al., and Silverbrook remains as applied above and continues to teach the tray includes a gripping portion, and wherein in a case where the tray rotates with respect to the tray holding portion, the gripping portion is located below the tray holding portion in the gravitational direction (Hirashima – Figure 1, Reference #8 (Lip) and Silverbrook – Figure 8, Reference #609, shown above).
As related to dependent claim 7, the combination of HATANO et al., Hirashima et al., and Silverbrook remains as applied above and continues to teach the tray holding portion inclines so that the rotation center is further from an installation surface of the liquid supply apparatus than the connection portion (Silverbrook – Figure 8, Reference #629, #628, & #608, shown above).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of HATANO et al. (US 2017/0057236 A1), Hirashima et al. (US 6,817,699 B2), and Silverbrook (US 7,258,435 B2) and further in view of Miyashita et al. (US 2013/0002780 A1).
The combination of HATANO et al., Hirashima et al., and Silverbrook remains as applied above and continues to teach the tray slides and moves in the first direction (HATANO et al. – Figure 2, Reference Arrow X and Hirashima et al. – Figures 1, 3, & 4, all shown above) but does not specifically teach the sliding occurring via a roller. However, Miyashita et al. teaches a liquid discharge apparatus comprising a consumable tray and guide which slides and moves in a first direction and specifically teaches the tray slides and moves in a first direction via a first roller (Miyashita et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 4-6 and Figure 3, Reference #T, #D, & #25, shown below) and therefore the tray rotates with a point of the tray contacting the first roller as a rotation center (Hirashima et al. – Figure 1; Silverbrook – Figure 8, Reference #608; and Miyashita et al. – Figure 3, Reference #T & #25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize the tray of the combination of HATANO et al., Hirashima et al., and Silverbrook which slides into and out of positions would slide via a commonly used design [i.e. guides, rails, or rollers] and modifying the slide component with the roller(s) of Miyashita et al. in an effort to ensure a tray guide for guiding a tray holding a consumable is transported into the appropriate position (Miyashita et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 4-6).
PNG
media_image10.png
338
456
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim [claims 1], but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim [claim 1] and any intervening claims [claim 4].
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As related to further dependent claims 5-6, a substantial search was conducted and the related art and prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the tray includes a second roller arranged upstream of the first roller in the first direction which moves upward in the gravitational direction.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Iwatsuki et al. (US 2003/0197772 A1) teaches a liquid discharge apparatus with a liquid discharge head and a tray which holds a consumable and slides and rotates for easy loading of the consumable. Kudo et al. (US 7,425,059 B2) teaches a liquid supply apparatus which includes a slidably inserted tray accommodating a liquid container. Osawa et al. (US 2008/0316282 A1) teaches a liquid discharge apparatus having liquid containers in a tray that rotates. KOBAYASHI (US 2010/0045755 A1) teaches a liquid supply apparatus comprising a tray with a liquid container and a rotating lever which locks the tray into connection position. Takada et al. (US 2012/0300003 A1) teaches a liquid supply apparatus having a liquid container in a removable tray. Kobayashi et al. (US 8,882,249 B2) teaches a liquid discharge apparatus having a liquid supply apparatus comprising multiple trays each holding liquid containers having supply ports. Studer et al. (US 2014/0362145 A1) teaches a liquid supply apparatus having a tray with multiple liquid containers each having supply ports. TANAKA et al. (US 2015/0224777 A1) teaches a liquid discharge system having a liquid supply apparatus comprising a tray which rotates down in a gravitational direction and accommodates a liquid container with a supply port.
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular Figures & Reference Numbers, Columns, Paragraphs and Line Numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JOHN P ZIMMERMANN whose telephone number is (571)270-3049. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1730 EST.
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 (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 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.
/John P Zimmermann/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853