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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAITO et al. (US 2020/0094547 A1) in view of Hosono (US 2004/0257391 A1).
As related to independent claims 1, 10, & 11, SAITO et al. teaches a liquid ejection apparatus (claim 10), specifically a liquid ejection head (claim 1), and a method of controlling the liquid ejection head (claim 11) (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 3-5 and Figure 1, shown below) comprising an ejection portion ejecting a liquid in response to supply of a drive signal (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 3-5; Page 2, Paragraphs 27-28; and Figure 1, shown below); a supply unit supplying the drive signal to the ejection portion; and a detection unit detecting a vibration in the ejection portion (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 3-5; Page 2, Paragraphs 27-28; and Figures 1, 5, & 6, all shown below), wherein the supply unit supplies a check drive signal having a check waveform of the drive signal to the ejection portion in a first unit period started by a first latch pulse of a plurality of latch pulses contained in a latch signal supplied to the supply unit and ended by a second latch pulse provided next to the first latch pulse of the plurality of latch pulses, and the detection unit detects a vibration remaining in the ejection portion in a second unit period started by the second latch pulse and ended by a third latch pulse provided next to the second latch pulse of the plurality of latch pulses (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 3-5; Page 2, Paragraphs 27-28; Page 3, Paragraph 34; and Figures 1, 5, & 6, all shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
626
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
450
644
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
582
440
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Continuing with claims 1, 10, & 11, SAITO et al. does not specifically teach two separate control periods being bound by consecutive latch pulses. However, Hosono teaches a liquid ejection apparatus (claim 10), specifically a liquid ejection head (claim 1), and a method of controlling the liquid ejection head (claim 11) (Hosono – Figures 2 & 6, shown below) comprising an ejection portion ejecting a liquid in response to supply of a drive signal, and specifically teaches a first unit period bounded by a first and a second latch pulse [i.e. T1 & LAT] and a second, unique, unit period bounded by the second latch pulse and a third latch pulse [i.e. T2 & LAT] (Hosono – Figure 7, shown below). 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 control periods of SAITO et al. to be separate and unique as taught by Hosono in an effort to provide a liquid ejection apparatus which prevents viscosity increase and increases processing speed (Hosono – Page 1, Paragraphs 3-5).
PNG
media_image4.png
554
452
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
430
452
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
458
528
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As related to dependent claims 2 & 12, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach at a timing corresponding to each of a plurality of unit periods defined by the plurality of latch pulses, the supply unit is supplied with a designation signal for designating whether to eject the liquid from the ejection portion in each of the plurality of unit periods, and the supply unit supplies the drive signal to the ejection portion based on the designation signal in each of the plurality of unit periods (SAITO et al. – Page 2, Paragraph 23 and Page 3, Paragraph 34).
As related to further dependent claims 3 & 13, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach the supply unit is supplied with a change signal having a plurality of change pulses for dividing each of the plurality of unit periods into a plurality of control periods, a designation signal supplied to the supply unit at a timing corresponding to one unit period of the plurality of unit periods designates whether to eject the liquid from the ejection portion in each of the plurality of control periods forming the one unit period, and the supply unit supplies the drive signal to the ejection portion based on the designation signal supplied to the supply unit at the timing corresponding to the one unit period in each of the plurality of control periods forming the one unit period (SAITO et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 34; Page 4, Paragraph 40; and Page 5, Paragraphs 44-45).
As related to dependent claims 4 & 14, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach the detection unit detects the vibration remaining in the ejection portion in a detection period started by a detection start pulse contained in a period designation signal supplied to the supply unit and ended by a detection end pulse contained in the period designation signal in the second unit period (SAITO et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 34; Page 4, Paragraph 40; and Page 5, Paragraphs 44-45).
As related to further dependent claims 5 & 15, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach the drive signal includes a detection drive signal supplied to the ejection portion in at least a part of the second unit period, the check drive signal indicates a first potential at a timing when the second latch pulse is supplied to the supply unit, and the detection drive signal maintains the first potential in at least a period from the timing when the second latch pulse is supplied to the supply unit to a timing when the detection period is started in the second unit period (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 5; Page 2, Paragraphs 27-28; Page 3, Paragraph 34; and Page 5, Paragraph 47).
As related to further dependent claims 6 & 16, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach the check waveform is a waveform that changes from the first potential to a second potential, and then, changes from the second potential to the first potential (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 5; Page 5, Paragraph 47; Page 8, Paragraphs 61-63; and Figures 7 & 11, shown below).
PNG
media_image7.png
348
542
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
336
534
media_image8.png
Greyscale
As related to further dependent claims 7 & 17, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach the ejection portion includes a piezoelectric element driven by the drive signal, a pressure chamber filled with a liquid and having a volume that changes according to driving of the piezoelectric element, and a nozzle ejecting the liquid in the pressure chamber according to the change of the volume of the pressure chamber, and the volume of the pressure chamber when the drive signal supplied to the piezoelectric element indicates the first potential is larger than the volume of the pressure chamber when the drive signal supplied to the piezoelectric element indicates the second potential (SAITO et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 3-5; Page 2, Paragraph 27; Page 4, Paragraph 36; Page 5, Paragraph 47; Figure 7, shown above; and Figure 3, Reference #PZ, #322, & #N, shown below).
PNG
media_image9.png
360
390
media_image9.png
Greyscale
As related to further dependent claims 8 & 18, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach a time during which the check waveform changes from the first potential to the second potential is longer than a time during which the check waveform changes from the second potential to the first potential (SAITO et al. – Page 5, Paragraph 47; Page 8, Paragraphs 61-63; and Figures 7 & 11, shown above).
As related to dependent claims 9 & 19, the combination of SAITO et al. and Hosono remains as applied above and continues to teach the drive signal has a plurality of drive waveforms including the check waveform, and in one unit period defined by the plurality of latch pulses, a time length from an end of the check waveform to an end of the one unit period is shorter than a time length from an end of all drive waveforms other than the check waveform of the plurality of drive waveforms to an end of the one unit period (SAITO et al. – Page 5, Paragraph 47; Page 8, Paragraphs 61-63; and Figures 7 & 11, shown above).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1, 10, & 11 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Morikoshi et al. (US 6,382,754 B1) teaches an ink jet printing device with separate waveform unit periods initiated by separate latch pulses.
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
Prosecution Insights