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 based on an application filed in Japan on August 9, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2023-130376 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 8, 2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2 recites, “a cap to be attached (Emphasis added).” The phrase “to be” implies a sequence of operations or steps, despite the claim being directed to an apparatus. It is recommended to change the recitation to read, “a cap configured to be attached.”
Claim 1, line 3 recites, “a supply portion which accumulates a humidifying medium therein, generates humidified air…, and supplies the humidified air.” For the same reason as above, it is recommended to change the recitation to read, “a supply portion which is configured to accumulate a humidifying medium therein, to generate humidified air…, and to supply the humidified air.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taira (US 2013/0010028 A1) in view of Hara et al. (US 6481826 B1), hereinafter Hara.
Regarding claim 1, Taira teaches a maintenance device, comprising: a cap to be attached to a nozzle surface of an inkjet head (fig. 5; support-cap unit 50; ¶[0044]); and a supply portion which accumulates a humidifying medium therein, generates humidified air by causing air to pass through the humidifying medium, and supplies the humidified air to the cap via an air supply pipe that is in communication with the cap (fig. 5; humidification unit 60, supply pump 63, tank 64, tube 67; ¶[0057]-[0059]), wherein inside the supply portion, the air supply pipe is provided along an up-down direction in a space higher than a fluid level of the humidifying medium (fig. 5; vertical section of tube 67; ¶[0057]-[0059]). However, Taira fails to teach or fairly suggest the air supply pipe is provided with a cut on at least an inner surface side of a pipe wall of the air supply pipe.
Hara teaches a cap for an inkjet nozzle surface comprising a return pipe provided along an up-down direction and provided with a cut on at least an inner surface side of a pipe wall (figs. 25-29; suction pipe 56, liquid retainer 58, ribs 58a; see col. 22, ln. 45 to col. 24, ln. 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the pipe of Hara into the maintenance device of Taira in order to provide an internal structure to the air pipe that maintains the humidity within the cap.
Regarding claim 2, Taira as modified by Hara teaches the maintenance device according to claim 1. Hara further teaches the cut is provided along the up-down direction (see depictions of suction pipe 56 in figs. 2, 25-29; see col. 22, ln. 45 to col. 24, ln. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Taira as modified by Hara teaches the maintenance device according to claim 2. Hara further teaches the cut penetrates a lower end surface of the pipe wall (see figs. 26-28; see col. 22, ln. 45 to col. 24, ln. 9).
Regarding claim 5, Taira teaches an inkjet recording apparatus, comprising: a plurality of the inkjet heads (fig. 2; ejection openings 14a, actuator units 17; ¶[0038]-[0042]); and Taira as modified by Hara teaches the maintenance device according to claim 1, detailed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the maintenance device of the claim, particularly including and in combination with, the cut penetrates from an inner surface to an outer surface of the pipe wall.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shimazaki (US 2009/0109257 A1) teaches a capping and humidifying unit supplied by a tube and maintained at a position above a supply reservoir. Matsui et al. (US 2016/0121613 A1) teaches a humidifying device for a capping unit. Sakurai (US 2007/0247486 A1) teaches an ink suction and capping device comprising a tube with a star shape.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS RAY KNIEF whose telephone number is (703)756-5733. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM - 5 PM 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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 5712722149. 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.
/TRK/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853