CTNF 18/795,741 CTNF 86964 DETAILED ACTION 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “unit” in all claims. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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 1 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. The claim recites wherein the intermediate unit includes a second transport path that transports the medium to the first unit through the drying unit. However, if the intermediate unit of the present invention is item 300 shown in Figure 8, as detailed in the specification, it would appear that the transport paths included in the intermediate unit cannot also be said to be included in the first unit 500, which includes the drying unit. Clarification is required. Because all other claims depend from claim 1, they are also rejected on this basis. Claim 3 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. The claim recites wherein the heating unit “is provided in a transport direction of the medium,” but an object such as a heating roller cannot be “provided in a direction.” That is, a physical component does not have a direction. Clarification is required. Because claims 4 and 5 depend from claim 3, they are also rejected on this basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim (s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Harada et al. (2020/0198369) . Regarding claim 1, Harada teaches a medium processing apparatus comprising: a intermediate unit (fig. 1, item 3) receiving a medium (see fig. 1), on which recording has been performed, from a liquid ejecting apparatus (fig. 1, item 10); and a first unit (fig. 1, item 5) performing processing to the medium received from the intermediate unit (see fig. 1), wherein the first unit includes a drying unit (fig. 1, item 50) that performs a drying processing on the medium ([0092]) and a processing unit (fig. 1, item 6) that processes the medium ([0055]), the intermediate unit includes a first transport path (fig. 1, item 35) that transports the medium to the first unit without passing through the drying unit and a second transport path (fig. 1, item 33) that transports the medium to the first unit through the drying unit (Note that both transport paths are used in transporting the medium from the intermediate unit to the first unit. Note also that the claim does not require that a particular medium does not travel on both paths). Regarding claim 2, Harada teaches the medium processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first transport path is shorter than the second transport path (see fig. 1). Regarding claim 3, Harada teaches the medium processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the drying unit includes a transport unit (fig. 2, item 54) that transports a medium and one heating unit (fig. 2, item 51) that heats the medium transported by the transport unit and is provided in a transport direction of the medium (see fig. 2), and the medium is transported to a heating area by the heating unit a plurality of times (see fig. 2, Note that any sheet can be fed through the heating assembly more than one time). Regarding claim 4, Harada teaches the medium processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the transport unit has a loop-like transport path including the heating area and configured to circumferentially transport the medium (see fig. 2), and as the medium passes through the loop-like transport path, the medium passes through the heating area a plurality of times (see fig. 2, Note that any sheet can be fed through the heating assembly more than one time). Regarding claim 5, Harada teaches the medium processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the heating unit includes a heating roller pair (fig. 2, item 51) that holds the medium between a driving roller driven to rotate and a driven roller driven to rotate by the rotation of the driving roller and transports the medium, and one or both of the driving roller and the driven roller is heated (see fig. 2). Regarding claim 6, Harada teaches the medium processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a control unit (fig. 1, item 25), wherein the control unit select a path for transporting the medium according to a condition (see fig. 1, Note 1) that this could mean anything and 2) that any printing apparatus with multiple paths would necessarily meet the limitation as some condition must dictate which path is selected for medium transport) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada in view of Masuda (2013/0229458) and Felton et al. (2017/0157727) . Regarding claim 7, Harada teaches the recording system comprising: a liquid ejecting apparatus (fig. 1, item 10) that performs recording on a medium; and the medium processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the liquid ejecting apparatus includes a liquid ejecting head (fig. 1, item 20) that includes a nozzle surface on which a nozzle is open and that ejects a liquid through the nozzle ([0059]), a housing (fig. 1, item 10) that accommodates the liquid ejecting head (see fig. 1). Harada does not teach a moving mechanism that moves the liquid ejecting head relative to the housing in a moving direction intersecting the nozzle surface, and a duct in which fluid flows, the duct includes a first coupling section coupled to the housing and a second coupling section coupled to the liquid ejecting head. Masuda teaches this (Masuda, figs. 1, 3, Note that PG can be changed to move the head in a first direction, and note duct 22c with a first coupling section coupled to head 13 and a second coupling section coupled to the housing at 23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the moving mechanism and duct disclosed by Masuda because doing so would allow for regulation of the print gap while also allowing for removal of ink mist during printing, which would facilitate higher quality printing. Harada in view of Masuda does not teach wherein the duct is configured to expand and contract in the moving direction. Felton teaches this (Felton, see figs. 2, 3, Note first coupling section 45 and second coupling section 41. Note that first duct 45 is stationary so as to be attached to the “housing” portion of the device, and second duct 41 is attached to the “liquid ejecting head” portion 50 of the device so that, when item 50 is retracted away from the workpiece, the second duct is pulled away from the workpiece with item 50 while port 45 remains stationary). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to construct the duct disclosed by Harada in view of Masuda in the length-adjustable manner disclosed by Felton because doing so would allow for the suction port to be moved with respect to the exhaust port without putting stress on the duct itself. Upon combination of references, the resultant device would have the first coupling section coupled to the housing and the second coupling section coupled to the liquid ejecting head. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. 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 571-202-5960. 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. /ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 2 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 3 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 4 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 5 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 6 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 7 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/795,741 Page 8 Art Unit: 2853
Prosecution Insights