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 .
Amendment received 12/8/25 was entered into the record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 depends from cancelled claim 3 rendering the scope of the claim entirely unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
As best understood, claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yukimachi et al. US 5,501,444 (“Yukimachi”).
Regarding claim 1, Yukimachi disclosed a media conveying apparatus comprising:
a roller (2) provided rotatably around a rotation shaft (2a);
a drive shaft mechanically coupled to the rotation shaft (col. 4, lines 4-12);
a holder (50) holding the rotation shaft and the drive shaft, the holder having a swing shaft (51) about which the holder swings;
a driving source (col. 4, lines 4-12); and
a universal joint, including a joint shaft (39) to transmit a driving force from the driving source to the drive shaft,
wherein the joint shaft is located horizontally when viewed from a media conveyance direction when no medium is conveyed (see Figure 2), and
a distance between the drive shaft and the swing shaft is smaller than a distance between the rotation shaft and the swing shaft (see Figure 2 noting the smaller diameter shaft 2a).
Regarding claim 2, Yukimachi disclosed a guide (a part of the top surface of cassette 4, for example) to guide a medium, wherein a distance between the drive shaft and the guide is larger than a distance between the swing shaft and the guide (see at least Figures 1 and 2).
As best understood, Yukimachi disclosed the subject matter of claim 4, seen in Figure 2 and col. 4, lines 4-12).
Regarding claim 5, Yukimachi disclosed the swing shaft is located on the same side as the roller with respect to a virtual plane defined by extending a nip plane of the roller in a media conveyance direction (see Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 6, Yukimachi disclosed a torque limiter (38) on the rotation shaft.
Regarding claim 8, Yukimachi disclosed the distance between the rotation shaft and the swing shaft is smaller than a diameter of the roller (see Figure 2).
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukimachi in view of Aoki et al. US 2019/0344985 (“Aoki”). Yukimachi taught the limitations of claim 1 as listed above, but did not teach an electromagnetic clutch. Aoki teaches an electromagnetic clutch (paragraph 0114) to control a load applied to the roller through a drive coupling. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use an electromagnetic clutch to discontinue transmitted force to the roller as needed as is entirely well-known in the art of feeding sheets and taught by Aoki.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection necessitated by the amendment.
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 HOWARD J SANDERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3096. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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.
/HOWARD J SANDERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653