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
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.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication 20150226479 to Fujita in view of FR2472137 to Hans (The art rejection is based on the respective English translation by PE2E)
In Reference to Claim 1
Fujita discloses a drying device which dries a recording medium on which an image is formed, while conveying the recording medium, the drying apparatus comprising: a conveying member (Fig. 1, 82) which supports and conveys the recording medium in a predetermined conveyance direction; and a heating device (Fig. 1, 40) which heats the recording medium conveyed by the conveying member under a high temperature environment, wherein, the heating device includes: a heater (Fig. 3, 43) which emits infrared ray; a reflector (Fig. 3, 48) which reflects the infrared ray emitted from the heater toward the recording medium;
Fujita does not teach a lifting mechanism.
Hans teaches a lifting mechanism (Fig. 1, 12/10) which lifts and lowers the reflector (Fig. 1, 1) relative to the heater (Fig. 1, 3) to change a number of reflections of the infrared ray.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teachings from Hans into the design of Fujita. Doing so, would result in the teaching of Hans being implemented into the design of Fujita. Both inventions of Fujita and Hans teaches to improve the adjustment possibilities of a device of this type.
In Reference to Claim 2
Fujita discloses the drying apparatus.
Fujita does not teach the adjust height of the infrared heater.
Hans teaches the lifting mechanism lifts (Fig. 1, 12/10) the reflector to decrease the number of reflections when intensity of the infrared ray irradiated on the recording medium is desired to be increased. (The office considers that the adjustment of the intensity of the infrared ray is the result of the recited structure).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teachings from Hans into the design of Fujita. Doing so, would result in the teaching of Hans being implemented into the design of Fujita. Both inventions of Fujita and Hans teaches to improve the adjustment possibilities of a device of this type.
In Reference to Claims 3 and 4
Fujita discloses a plurality of the reflectors (As showed in Fig. 1)
Fujita does not teach the height adjustable mechanism.
Hans teaches each infrared housing having a respective lifting mechanism (Fig. 1, 10/12)
The Office considers that either lift at the same time or individually is a process result of the respected structure.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teachings from Hans into the design of Fujita. Doing so, would result in the teaching of Hans being implemented into the design of Fujita. Both inventions of Fujita and Hans teaches to improve the adjustment possibilities of a device of this type.
In Reference to Claim 5
Fujita discloses the dryer system with the infrared heater.
Fujita does not teach the type of the life mechanism.
Hans teaches the lifting mechanism is a rack and pinion mechanism.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teachings from Hans into the design of Fujita. Doing so, would result in the teaching of Hans being implemented into the design of Fujita. Both inventions of Fujita and Hans teaches to improve the adjustment possibilities of a device of this type.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMING WAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1410. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur: 8 am to 6 PM.
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 Hoang can be reached at 57122726460. 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.
DEMING . WAN
Examiner
Art Unit 3762
/DEMING WAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762 8/21/26
Prosecution Insights