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 .
Specification
Amendments to the specification were received on 6/15/2026. These amendments preserve the original scope of disclosure and are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: please change the recitation of “a top surface of the cartridge” to “the [a] top surface of the cartridge”, since amended claim 1 now provides antecedent basis for this limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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. Please see the newly applied prior art to Muhl, which teaches, inter alia, the feature of “an upper edge portion of the restriction portion is at a higher position than a top surface of the cartridge.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1/2) as being anticipated by Muhl (US 2008/0018705 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Muhl disclose a printing apparatus comprising:
a housing portion (carrier 126) for detachably housing a cartridge (printing module 11) having an element substrate that ejects liquid (paragraph 55 & Fig. 4);
a restriction portion (any of sidewalls 122, 123 and “center wall”: Fig. 2) configured to restrict movement of the cartridge in a horizontal direction intersecting with an insertion direction (vertically, in Fig. 3) in which the cartridge is inserted to the housing portion (Figs. 2-3); and
a cover portion (bolt 121) configured to be movable between (1) a first position (“closed”) for fixing the cartridge to the housing portion (paragraph 50 & Fig. 3) and (2) a second position (“folded back”) for allowing the cartridge to be attached to and detached from the housing portion (paragraph 50 & Fig. 3),
wherein the restriction portion is provided at the housing portion at an entry-side end portion of the housing portion (upper portion of carrier 126, shown in Fig. 3), the entry-side end portion being a side through which the cartridge first enters the housing portion when the cartridge is inserted in the insertion direction (Fig. 3), and
wherein, in a state where the cover portion is at the first position and the cartridge is housed in the housing portion, an upper edge portion of the restriction portion is at a higher position than a top surface of the cartridge (each of the sidewalls 122, 123 and the “center wall” are shown to be higher than cartridge: Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3 (as best understood):
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that, in a state where the cover portion is at the second position, a vertical distance from an upper edge portion of the restriction portion and a rear edge portion of the cover portion is shorter than a distance from a bottom surface to the top surface of the cartridge (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4:
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the housing portion includes a first housing portion (for left-hand printing module 11) and a second housing portion (for right-hand printing module 11) arranged in the horizontal direction (Figs. 2-3),
wherein at least a part of the restriction portion (at least the “center wall”) is provided between the first housing portion and the second housing portion (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 6:
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the cover portion includes a press portion that, at the first position, presses the cartridge inserted in the housing portion (inherent to resting on the printing module 11 with a “force transmitting connection”: paragraph 57 & Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15:
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 4, and also that a cover portion (121) is provided for each of the first housing portion and the second housing portion (Fig. 2), the cover portions being movable between a first position for fixing the cartridge to the housing portion and a second position for allowing the cartridge to be attached to an detached from the housing portion (paragraph 50 & Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 17:
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the housing portion includes an opening configured to allow electrical connection between the cartridge and a board that the printing apparatus has (paragraph 53 & Figs. 3, 5).
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.
Claim(s) 7, 10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muhl (US 2008/0018705 A1) in view of Iwata et al. (US 2009/0278902 A1).
Regarding claim 7:
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 6, but does not expressly disclose a press portion that includes a biasing member that biases the cartridge.
However, Iwata et al. disclose a printing apparatus comprising a cover portion (set cover 13) that has a press portion (at least presser portion 15) that, at a first position, presses a cartridge (11) inserted in a housing portion (paragraph 33 & Fig. 4), wherein the press portion includes a biasing member (presser portion 15) that biases the cartridge so as to fixedly set the cartridge in the housing portion (paragraph 33).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Muhl’s cover portion to include a biasing press portion, such as taught by Iwata et al.
Regarding claim 10:
Muhl’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 9, but Muhl does not expressly disclose that the push portion is biased by a push spring.
However, Iwata et al. disclose a printing apparatus comprising a push portion (release lever 16) configured to bias a cartridge in a direction opposite from an insertion direction (Figs. 4-6), wherein the push portion is biased by a push spring (elastic body 19) so as to automatically return to a protruding state (paragraph 31).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Muhl’s printing apparatus to include a push portion having a push spring, such as taught by Iwata et al.
Regarding claim 12:
Muhl’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 10, and Iwata et al. also disclose that the push spring is a coil spring (19), wherein the push portion biases the cartridge on a same axis as the push spring in a direction in which the push spring is extended or compressed (paragraph 31 & Fig. 4).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muhl (US 2008/0018705 A1).
Regarding claim 8:
Muhl discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the housing portion, the restriction portion, and the cover portion are mounted at a carriage (Fig. 2).
Muhl does not expressly disclose that the carriage is configured to move in the printing apparatus.
However, Examiner takes Official Notice that installation of a printhead cartridge is commonly performed into a moving carriage, so as to enable printing across an entire width of media.
Therefore, at the time of filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Muhl’s printing apparatus to mount the cartridge into a serial-type moving carriage.
Regarding claim 9:
Muhl’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 8, and Muhl also discloses that the carriage includes a push portion (guide lever 124) by which, in a state where the cover portion is at the second position, the cartridge housed in the housing portion is biased in a direction opposite from the insertion direction (paragraph 60 & Fig. 9) and which is, in a state where the cover portion is at the first position, located apart from the cartridge housed in the housing portion (Fig. 6, especially Detail C).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muhl (US 2008/0018705 A1) in view of Tsujiuchi et al. (US 2015/0343785 A1).
Regarding claim 13:
Muhl’s modified apparatus comprises all the limitations of claim 8, but does not expressly disclose that the carriage includes a lock unit configured to lock the cover portion to the first position by bringing part of the cover portion and part of the housing portion into engagement.
However, Tsujiuchi et al. disclose a carriage that includes a lock unit (25, 34) configured to lock a cover portion (lever 3) to a first position by bringing part of the cover portion (retainer 35) and part of a housing portion (catch 25 of cover 2) into engagement (paragraph 24 & Figs. 2A-C). Tsujiuchi et al. teach that such a configuration stabilizes an engaged state of the cartridge (paragraph 24).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Muhl’s apparatus in the manner taught by Tsujiuchi et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 14 are allowed.
Please see prosecution history concerning the reasons for allowance of these claims.
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.
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shelby L Fidler whose telephone number is (571)272-8455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am - 5pm 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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
SHELBY L. FIDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights