DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
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.
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: “rotating member” and “temperature detecting member” 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
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 “in a cross section orthogonal to a width direction of the recording medium, the width direction intersecting a conveyance direction of the recording material, and including the temperature detection member…” While it is believed the recitation is intended so that the cross section includes the temperature detection member, the claim language is unclear. The claim would appear to state that the width direction includes the temperature detection member. Clarification is required.
Because all other claims depend from claim 1, they are also rejected on this basis.
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) 1 and 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shima (2014/0368590) in view of Tamai et al. (2019/0061381) and Borsuk et al. (9,439,273).
Regarding claim 1, Shima teaches an inkjet recording apparatus comprising:
an ink image forming unit (fig. 1, item 5) configured to form an ink image on a recording medium (see fig. 1); and
a fixing apparatus (fig. 1, item 8) arranged downstream of the ink image forming unit in a conveyance direction (fig. 1, direction D) of the recording medium and configured to fix the ink image on the recording medium while pinching and conveying the recording medium ([0027]),
wherein the fixing apparatus includes:
a heater (fig. 1, item 81);
a reflector (fig. 1, item 82) configured to cover an upper portion of the heater and to reflect radiant heat from the heater toward the media (see fig. 1);
an opening (fig. 1, opening in which sensor 90 is disposed) is formed on the reflector (see fig. 1); and
a temperature detection member (fig. 1, item 90) configured to detect a temperature of a heating area of the heater ([0031]) wherein the temperature detection member is arranged to detect a temperature of the medium from the opening ([0031], [0033], 0043], Note that the temperature of the sheets is detected without contact),
wherein, in a cross section orthogonal to a width direction of the recording medium, the width direction intersecting a conveyance direction of the recording material, and including the temperature detection member, the reflector includes a reflecting portion arranged on a line segment connecting the heater and the temperature detection member to reflect radiant heat directed from the heater toward the temperature detection member (see fig. 1, Note cross section including temperature detection member 90. Note that a line segment can be drawn through the temperature detection member 90, the heater 81 and a reflecting portion 82 on the opposite side of the heater from the detection member 90 that reflects radiant heat back toward the detection member 90).
Shima does not teach wherein the fixing apparatus includes a first belt configured to rotate and come into contact with the ink image formed by the ink image forming unit; a rotating member configured to come into contact with the first belt to form a nip portion. Tamai teaches a belt and a rotating member forming a nip with a heater inside the belt so as to heat the nip point (Tamai, fig. 15). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a dual belt fixing/decurling arrangement of the type disclosed by Tamai instead of the contactless fixing arrangement disclosed by Shima because doing so would allow for more higher temperature and pressure to be applied to the media with ink on it, thereby ensuring more reliable fixing/decurling.
(Examiner is aware that Tamis device is a decurling device, and not a necessarily a fixing device, as disclosed by Shima. Nonetheless, Examiner maintains it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to apply the double-belt pressure/temperature arrangement to any application needing pressure or temperature applied to a print media).
Upon combination of references, the resultant device would meet the limitations: the heater and reflector are arranged inside the first belt and configured to heat the nip portion without contact and the temperature sensor would sense the temperature of an inner circumferential surface of the first belt in the nip portion, and the reflector would cover a side of the heater opposite the nip portion.
Shima in view of Tamai does not disclose wherein the temperature detection member is configured to detect the temperature of the heating area through the opening. Borsuk teaches a UV intensity sensor that detects a UV intensity inside a reflector through and opening in the reflector (Shima, fig. 4B, Note detector 70 detects UV intensity inside reflector through opening 47). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to detect the heat of the device disclosed by Shima in view of Tamai through and opening in the manner disclosed by Borsuk because doing so would amount to the simple substitution of one known sensor arrangement for another to obtain predictable results. Indeed, Borsuk teaches several different arrangements including one similar to that of Shima, and thus the arrangements can be considered obvious variants.
(It is understood that Borsuk is directed to a UV intensity sensor, not a temperature sensor, as disclosed by Shima. Regardless, Examiner maintains it would have been obvious to apply the arrangement of Borsuk to any number of drying/reflector arrangements, including a heater).
Further, it should be noted that while Borsuk has been incorporated in this rejection, a case could be made that Shima’s temperature detection member could be said to detect temperature “through the opening” the temperature detector itself extends through Shima’s opening.
Regarding claim 3, Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the reflector has an opening at a position where the temperature detection member is attached (Shima, see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the opening is a notch formed at one of an upstream end or a downstream end of the reflector in the conveyance direction of the recording medium (Shima, see fig. 1, Note that sensor 90 fits into a notch at the upstream end of the reflector in the conveyance direction).
Regarding claim 5, Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk teaches the ink jet recording apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the reflector does not interfere with a viewing angle of the temperature detection member (Shima, see fig. 1, Note that there is nothing in between the sensor 90 and the medium S).
Regarding claim 6, Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the temperature detection member is located outside the reflector (Shima, fig. 1, Note that the temperature detection member is a separate physical object from the reflector, and thus is cannot be inside the reflector and must be outside of the reflector).
Regarding claim 8, Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein, in the cross section, the reflecting portion is arranged on a first line segment connecting the heater and an upper end of the temperature detecting member, and on a second line segment connecting the heater and a lower end of the temperature detection member.
PNG
media_image1.png
350
490
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein, in the cross section, the heater is located at a first portion, the temperature detection member is located at a second position closer to the nip portion than the first position, and the temperature detection member is arranged at a position farther from the nip portion an upper end of the opening (Note that, upon substitution of Borsuk’s sensor/reflector arrangement for that of Shima in view of Tamai, the limitation is met).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shima in view of Tamai and Borsuk as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wilde et al. (4,665,627).
Regarding claim 7, Shima in view of Tamai teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to Claim 1. Shima in view of Tamai does not teach wherein a notch is formed at a center in a width direction of the first belt. Wilde teaches this (Wilde, see figs. 5, 6, Note that temperature detection member 60 is at a position toward a center of the heater in a width direction of a media processing device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the temperature detection unit at a center in the width direction of the printer of Shima in view of Tamai because doing so would allow for detection of the highest temperature.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 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
Prosecution Insights