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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
Within the Summary and Aspect 13 sections, the phrase "second image forming apparatus to from the second image on said another surface" is identified as a typographical error intending to state “form”.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any additional errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 11, & 13 are objected to because of the following grammatical and typographical informalities:
Claim 2: “each of the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit partially coincide…” is not grammatically correct. A more grammatically correct phrasing is as follows: “the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit each partially coincide…”.
Claim 11: "on at least one of type or a thickness of the sheet" is not grammatically correct. A more grammatically correct phrasing is as follows: "on a type and/or a thickness of the sheet".
Claim 13: "second image forming apparatus to from the second image on said another surface" is as typographical error intending to state “form”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 5 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 word “inlet” is unclear given more than one inlet is discussed within the Applicant’s disclosure. In an effort to advance prosecution of the application, the examiner is interpreting the “inlet” specified in claim 5, with respect to the 103 prior art rejection, as referring to the inlet of the image forming apparatus.
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.
Claims 1-5, 9, & 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beier (US 20160159110 A1) in view of Mitsuyasu & Nakamura (US 20250128521 A1; herein referred to as “Mitsuyasu”).
With respect to Claim 1, Beier teaches an image forming apparatus (i.e., “a device for indirect inkjet printing with water-based inks”, aka “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) comprising:
an image former to form an image on a sheet (i.e., includes “print heads 16a to 16d”, “press roll 14”, and “circulating belt 2” to form image on sheet; Beier: ¶0097 & see annotated Beier Fig. 1 below for all components);
a dryer to dry the sheet on which the image is formed by the image former (i.e., “24”; Beier: ¶0101);
an inspection unit to inspect the image on the sheet (i.e., apparatus “32 for inspecting the sheets”; ¶0104),
wherein the dryer and the inspection unit are arranged below the image former (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
601
849
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Beier is silent on an image forming apparatus comprising:
a cooler to cool the sheet dried by the dryer
an inspection unit to inspect the image on the sheet cooled by the cooler
wherein the cooler is arranged below the image former.
Mitsuyasu teaches an image forming apparatus (i.e., “ink jet printing system”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0087 & Fig. 1) comprising:
a cooler to cool the sheet dried by the dryer (i.e., a cooler system composed of a “cooling roller 30 that functions as a cooling device” to cool the sheet, which is part of “drying device 24” which also includes a dryer composed of “heat rollers 32” which dries the sheet prior to the cooling process; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2). This teaching by Mitsuyasu illustrates that cooling the sheet can be considered a downstream sub-part of the process of drying the sheet prior to the sheet being transported to an inspection unit. As shown in Mitsuyasu Fig. 2, the cooler (“30”) is used to cool the sheet after it is dried by the dryer. Note that although “drying device 14” is shown in Fig. 2, this drying device configuration is also representative of “drying device 24” (Mitsuyasu: ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, that Beier’s “dryer 24” could have included a cooler (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below). By using the “drying device 24” configuration taught by Mitsuyasu (i.e., containing a dryer and a cooler) in the position shown by Beier’s “dryer 24”, this cooler would also meet the other claimed limitations of its positioning in relation to the inspection unit and the image former (as listed below):
an inspection unit to inspect the image on the sheet cooled by the cooler (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below, which shows the inspection unit is downstream of the cooler).
wherein the cooler is arranged below the image former (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below).
PNG
media_image2.png
600
949
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24”, and therefore arranged below the image former; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer.
With respect to Claim 2, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1, wherein each of the dryer and the inspection unit partially coincide with a part of the image former in a vertical direction (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above).
Beier is silent on wherein the cooler partially coincides with a part of the image former in a vertical direction.
Mitsuyasu teaches wherein the cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within Beier’s “24”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2) partially coincides with a part of the image former in a vertical direction (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above). Also see discussion in Claim 1 for more details.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24”, and therefore arranged below the image former in a vertical direction; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer. As taught by Mitsuyasu, having the cooler located within the overall drying structure (which partially coincides with a part of the image former in a vertical direction) is a beneficial arrangement given it is space-saving.
With respect to Claim 3, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1, further comprising a housing accommodating the image former (“housing 21”; Beier: Fig. 1). Note that Beier teaches the apparatus comprises a dryer (i.e., “24”; Beier: ¶0101) and an inspection unit (i.e., apparatus “32 for inspecting the sheets”; ¶0104).
Beier is silent on a housing accommodating the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the housing could have been enlarged so that the entire apparatus could be contained with housing. The concept of housing large enough to contain an entire apparatus would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Mitsuyasu teaches that the cooler “30” could be located within Beier’s “24” (Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2; also see more details in the discussion of Claim 1). Therefore, given it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the housing could be enlarged so that the entire apparatus, including “24”, could be contained with housing, and the cooler is contained with “24”, this teaches that it would be obvious for the cooler to also be contained within the housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24” and within the overall apparatus; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer. As taught by Mitsuyasu, having the cooler located within the overall drying structure (which is located within the overall apparatus) is a beneficial arrangement given it is space-saving.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to contain the entirety of the image forming apparatus (including the image former, the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit) within housing as this would protect these elements of equipment from being damaged by weather.
With respect to Claim 4, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1, wherein an inlet of the inspection unit is arranged below the image former (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above).
Beier is silent on wherein an outlet of the dryer and a whole of the cooler are arranged below the image former.
Mitsuyasu teaches wherein an outlet of the dryer (i.e., the location where the sheet exits out of the dryer towards the cooler; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 2; also see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below)and a whole of the cooler (i.e., cooler “30” located within Beier’s “24”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2; also see more details in the discussion of Claim 1) is arranged below the image former (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below).
PNG
media_image3.png
600
949
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), an outlet of the dryer, a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24”, therefore arranged below the image former; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer. As taught by Mitsuyasu, having the cooler located within the overall drying structure (which is arranged below the image former) is a beneficial arrangement given it is space-saving.
With respect to Claim 5, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1.
Beier is silent on further comprising an inlet disposed below an outlet of the dryer and a whole of the cooler.
Mitsuyasu teaches further comprising an inlet disposed below an outlet of the dryer (i.e., the location where the sheet exits out of the dryer within “24”; see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below & Mitsuyasu’s Fig. 2) and a whole of the cooler (i.e., cooler “30” located within Beier’s “24”, following the outlet of the dryer; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2; also see more details in the discussion of Claim 1). As discussed in Section “Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112” above, the Examiner is assuming “an inlet” is defining an inlet of the image forming apparatus. This inlet is disposed below Brier’s “24”, which as discussed above comprises an outlet of the dryer as well as a whole of the cooler (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below):
PNG
media_image4.png
603
949
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), an outlet of the dryer, a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24”, therefore arranged below the image former; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer. As taught by Beier in view of Mitsuyasu, having the cooler located within the overall drying structure (which is arranged above an inlet) is a beneficial arrangement given it is space-saving (Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2; also see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above).
With respect to Claim 9, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1.
Beier is silent on wherein the cooler includes: a cooling rotator to cool the sheet; and a guide member to guide the sheet.
Mitsuyasu teaches wherein the cooler includes: a cooling rotator to cool the sheet (“cooling roller 30 that functions as a cooling device”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2); and a guide member to guide the sheet (i.e., line under “30” guiding sheet “S”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 2). As noted earlier, although “drying device 14” is shown in Fig. 2, this drying device configuration is also representative of “drying device 24” (Mitsuyasu: ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2) and the cooler is located within “24” of Beier (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24” and a guide member to guide the sheet as shown by the line under “30” guiding sheet “S” in Mitsuyasu Fig. 2; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1-2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer and then be guided to the inspection unit. The particular use of a cooling rotator and a guide member to guide the sheet within this cooler is beneficial as “[t]he cooling roller 30 takes heat away from the paper S that is brought into contact with its outer peripheral surface and cools the paper S” (Mitsuyasu: ¶0167; Fig. 2) and that paper S is transported to the “cooling roller 30” via a guide (see the line under “30” guiding sheet “S”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 2).
With respect to Claim 12, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches an image forming system (i.e., device “1” and “central computer 40”; Beier: ¶0160) comprising:
the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1; and
circuitry configured to control the image forming apparatus (i.e., “central computer 40 controls the individual components of the device 1”; Beier: ¶0160).
With respect to Claim 13, Beier teaches an image forming system comprising: a first image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) comprising:
a first image former to form a first image on one surface of a sheet (i.e., includes “print heads 16a to 16d”, “press roll 14”, and “circulating belt 2” to form image on sheet; Beier: ¶0097 & see annotated Beier Fig. 1 above for all components);
a first dryer to dry the sheet on which the first image is formed by the first image former (i.e., “24”; Beier: ¶0101);
a first inspection unit to inspect the first image on the sheet (i.e., apparatus “32 for inspecting the sheets”; ¶0104),
wherein the first dryer and the first inspection unit are arranged below the first image former (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
601
849
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Beier is silent on an image forming apparatus comprising:
a first image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) comprising:
a first cooler to cool the sheet dried by the first dryer
a first inspection unit to inspect the first image on the sheet cooled by the first cooler
wherein the first cooler is arranged below the first image former.
a second image forming apparatus comprising:
a second image former to form a second image on another surface of the sheet having the one surface on which the first image has been formed;
a second dryer to dry the sheet on which the second image is formed by the second image former;
a second cooler to cool the sheet dried by the second dryer; and
a second inspection unit to inspect the second image on the sheet cooled by the second cooler; and
circuitry configured to control the second image former of the second image forming apparatus to from the second image on said another surface of the sheet based on an inspection result of the first inspection unit of the first image forming apparatus,
the second dryer, the second cooler, and the second inspection unit are arranged below the second image former.
Mitsuyasu teaches an image forming system (i.e., “ink jet printing system”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0087 & Fig. 1) comprising:
a first image forming apparatus comprising:
a first cooler to cool the sheet dried by the first dryer (i.e., a cooler system composed of a “cooling roller 30 that functions as a cooling device” to cool the sheet, which is part of “drying device 24” which also includes a dryer composed of “heat rollers 32” which dries the sheet prior to the cooling process; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2). This teaching by Mitsuyasu illustrates that cooling the sheet can be considered a downstream sub-part of the process of drying the sheet prior to the sheet being transported to an inspection unit. As shown in Mitsuyasu Fig. 2, the cooler (“30”) is used to cool the sheet after it is dried by the dryer. Note that although “drying device 14” is shown in Fig. 2, this drying device configuration is also representative of “drying device 24” (Mitsuyasu: ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, that Beier’s “dryer 24” could have included a cooler (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below). By using the “drying device 24” configuration taught by Mitsuyasu (i.e., containing a dryer and a cooler) in the position shown by Beier’s “dryer 24”, this first cooler would also meet the other claimed limitations of its positioning in relation to the inspection unit and the image former (as listed below):
a first inspection unit to inspect the first image on the sheet cooled by the first cooler (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below, which shows the inspection unit is downstream of the cooler).
wherein the first cooler is arranged below the first image former (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below).
PNG
media_image2.png
600
949
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a second image forming apparatus (Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138; Fig. 1). Mitsuyasu teaches the concept of having two image forming apparatuses run in succession with a paper inverting device (“20”) to enable double-sided printing (i.e., where the first image forming apparatus forms an image on one surface of a sheet and the second image forming apparatus forms an image another surface of the sheet; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138; Fig. 1). Therefore, Mitsuyasu teaches the concept of aligning two duplicates of Beier’s image forming apparatus with a paper inverting device in between them to enable the second image forming apparatus to form an image on another surface of the sheet being fed into the image forming system. Note that this means all the elements taught in Beier’s image forming apparatus (and it’s modifications taught by Mitsuyasu) would apply to both the first image forming apparatus as well as the second image forming apparatus within this image forming system. Based on this arrangement, the image forming system would be comprising:
a second image former to form a second image on another surface of the sheet having the one surface on which the first image has been formed (i.e., a duplicate Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu image forming apparatus positioned after a “paper inverting device 20” flips the sheet that emerged from a first Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu image forming apparatus; see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138 & Fig. 1).
In addition, all of the following are taught in this duplicate of the Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu image forming apparatus which is designated the second image forming apparatus (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138; ¶0165-0167; ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2):
a second dryer to dry the sheet on which the second image is formed by the second image former (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138; ¶0165-0167; ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2);
a second cooler to cool the sheet dried by the second dryer (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138; ¶0165-0167; ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2); and
a second inspection unit to inspect the second image on the sheet cooled by the second cooler (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138; ¶0165-0167; ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2).
circuitry configured to control the second image former of the second image forming apparatus to from the second image on said another surface of the sheet based on an inspection result of the first inspection unit of the first image forming apparatus (Mitsuyasu: Fig. 6, which shows circuitry which can communicate feedback from an inspection device to control a second printing device). Note that the Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu image forming system has two inspection devices (i.e., “32”; Beier: ¶0104 & annotated Fig. 1 above), the first of which is located with the first image forming apparatus and positioned prior to the “paper inverting device 20” (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138 & Fig. 1).
the second dryer, the second cooler, and the second inspection unit are arranged below the second image former (i.e., a duplicate arrangement of elements within the Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu first image former; see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138 & Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a cooler which cooled the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24”, and therefore arranged below the image former; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming system as having two of the image forming apparatuses connected via a paper inverting device in order to enable these apparatuses to form images on different surfaces of a sheet. This modification, which creates a double-sided printing system (i.e., two Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu image forming apparatuses with a “paper inverting device 20” positioned between them; Beier: annotated Fig. 1 above; Mitsuyasu: ¶0137-0138 & Fig. 1), is more convenient than re-feeding a sheet into the Beier image forming apparatus after manually inverting the sheet.
Claims 6 & 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beier in view of Mitsuyasu & Nakamura, and further in view of Onodera et al. (US 20230391107 A1; herein referred to as “Onodera”).
With respect to Claim 6, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1, further comprising a conveyor (i.e., “sheet guides 9 and 10”; Beier: ¶0097) to convey the sheet through the image former in a first direction (see annotated Beier Fig. 1 below, showing the direction the sheet is being conveyed). Note that Beier also teaches that the image forming apparatus comprises a dryer and an inspection unit (as shown in Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
601
849
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Beier is silent on a conveyer to:
convey the sheet through the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit in a second direction opposite to the first direction,
wherein the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit are arranged in an order of the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit in the second direction.
Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1 also contains a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within Beier’s “24”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2; see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) below). See the discussion of Claim 1 for more details.
PNG
media_image2.png
600
949
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Onodera teaches a conveyor (see annotated Onodera Fig. 1A below) to:
PNG
media_image5.png
559
889
media_image5.png
Greyscale
convey the sheet through the dryer (i.e., “heating roller 300”; Onodera: ¶0037-0040), the cooler (i.e., cooling air blown from “air duct 240”, which is located towards the rear side end of the cover of “thermopile unit 400”; Onodera: ¶0114-0116), and the inspection unit (i.e., “thermopile unit 400”, a type of inspection unit, can be modified with Beier’s “inspection unit 32”; Onodera: ¶0114-0116 & Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 above) in a second direction opposite to the first direction (i.e., clockwise, the opposite direction of the starting conveyance direction which is counter-clockwise; see annotated Onodera Fig. 1A above),
wherein the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit are arranged in an order of the dryer, the cooler, and the inspection unit in the second direction (see annotated Onodera Fig. 1A above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier’s image forming apparatus as having a conveyer which conveys the sheet through a cooler which cools the sheet between the drying and inspection processes using a configuration taught by Mitsuyasu showing the series of a dryer (i.e., “heat rollers 32” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), a cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” within “24”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1 & 2), and an inspection unit (i.e., “23”; Mitsuyasu: Fig. 1). This modification enables the sheet to more quickly return to cooler temperatures after being heated to higher temperatures in a dryer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the conveyor taught by Beier-modified-by-Mitsuyasu to replace it with the conveyor taught by Onodera, given this conveyor takes up less space. Moreover, arranging the dryer, cooler, and inspection unit taught by Beier in view of Mitsuyasu (see Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 (modified by Mitsuyasu) above) with the conveyor arrangement taught by Onodera enables the apparatus to conduct the same operations (i.e., drying, cooling, and inspecting) within a smaller footprint (see Onodera’s annotated Fig. 1A above).
With respect to Claim 8, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1. Note that Beier also teaches that the image forming apparatus comprises an inspection unit (as shown in Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
600
949
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Beier is silent on the inspection unit and the cooler generate airflow directed toward the dryer.
Mitsuyasu teaches the cooler (i.e., “cooling roller 30” and fan “34” within Beier’s “24”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 1-2; also see discussion in Claim 1 for more details) generates airflow directed towards the dryer (i.e., the cooler comprising “cooling roller 30” can also include a fan directing airflow to a dryer, such as “fan 34” blowing air facing dryer elements “heating rollers 32”; Mitsuyasu: ¶0165-0167, ¶0176, & Fig. 2). Moreover, Mitsuyasu teaches that additional fans can be dispersedly disposed along the paper transport path (Mitsuyasu: ¶0174). Also note that although “drying device 14” is shown in Fig. 2, this drying device configuration is also representative of “drying device 24” (Mitsuyasu: ¶0176 & Fig. 1-2).
Onodera teaches the inspection unit generates airflow directed towards the dryer (Onodera: ¶0114 & Fig. 1A). Onodera teaches a conveyor arrangement that conveys the sheet through a dryer (i.e., “heating roller 300”; Onodera: ¶0037-0040) and an inspection unit (i.e., “thermopile unit 400”, a type of inspection unit, which can be modified with Beier’s “inspection unit 32”; Onodera: ¶0114-0116 & Beier’s annotated Fig. 1 above). The “air duct 240” which is contained within the housing of an inspection unit (Onodera: ¶0114-0116) can be directed towards the dryer (i.e., “heating roller 300”; Onodera: ¶0114-0116 & Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Beier with the teachings of Mitsuyasu and Onodera so as to utilize the cooler and inspection unit to also generate airflow towards the dryer. Doing so regulates the temperature within the apparatus, balancing the temperature increase occurring due to the dryer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that decreasing the temperature of the dryer using pre-existing equipment would be space-saving, cost-saving, and increase the longevity of the apparatus’s equipment by decreasing the risk of equipment failure due to overheating.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beier in view of Mitsuyasu & Nakamura, and further in view of Nishimura et al. (US 20210016578 A1; herein referred to as “Nishimura”).
With respect to Claim 7, Beier teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 1, including a dryer (i.e., “24”; Beier: Fig. 1).
Beier is silent on wherein the dryer includes
multiple first heating rotators contacting with the sheet twice from different directions; and
three or more second heating rotators contacting with the sheet once, and
the three or more second heating rotators guide the sheet to bring one surface of the sheet that has been in contact with and passed through the first heating rotators, again, into contact with the first heating rotators.
Nishimura teaches wherein the dryer (i.e., “drying device 300”; Nishimura: ¶0108-0111; Fig. 15) includes
multiple first heating rotators contacting with the sheet twice from different directions (i.e., multiple “heating rollers 11”; Nishimura: ¶0108-0111; Fig. 15); and
three or more second heating rotators contacting with the sheet once (i.e., more than three “heating rollers 12”; Nishimura: ¶0108-0111; Fig. 15), and
the three or more second heating rotators guide the sheet to bring one surface of the sheet that has been in contact with and passed through the first heating rotators, again, into contact with the first heating rotators (Nishimura: Fig. 15: “12”, “11”, and see “conveyance direction” arrows).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the dryer include multiple heating rotators with the limitations claimed, because this creates efficient, multi-sided drying of the sheet in a space-saving configuration, reducing “a space in a height (vertical) direction of the drying device 300” (Nishimura: ¶0111; Fig. 15).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beier in view of Mitsuyasu & Nakamura, and further in view of Perkins et al. (US 4,997,358; herein referred to as “Perkins”).
With respect to Claim 10, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 9, further comprising circuitry (i.e., “a central computer”; Beier: ¶0107). Note that Beier teaches this circuitry can be used to control individual components of the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0107), including controlling the dryer(s) (including dryer “24”; Beier: ¶0107; Fig. 1).
Beier is silent on circuitry configured to reposition the guide member to vary a contact distance between the sheet and the cooling rotator.
Perkins teaches circuitry configured to reposition the guide member to vary a contact distance between the sheet and the cooling rotator (i.e., “plastic web” in varying contact distance with “roll 18”; Perkins: col. 6, l. 34-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Beier and its circuitry to have the repositionable guide member taught by Perkins. This modification provides more precise control of the cooling process of the sheets, enabling the apparatus “to control the time of contact of both sides of the plastic sheet” with the rotator, which results in a higher-quality product (Perkins: col. 6, l. 34-59).
With respect to Claim 11, Beier in view of Mitsuyasu, further in view of Perkins, teaches the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0035, ¶0049, & ¶0096) according to claim 10, further comprising circuitry (i.e., “a central computer”; Beier: ¶0107). Note that Beier teaches this circuitry can be used to control individual components of the image forming apparatus (i.e., “1”; Beier: ¶0107), including controlling the dryer(s) (including dryer “24”; Beier: ¶0107; Fig. 1).
Beier is silent on circuitry configured to reposition the guide member based on at least one of type or a thickness of the sheet.
Perkins teaches circuitry configured to reposition the guide member based on at least one of type or a thickness of the sheet (i.e., “varying thickness”; Perkins: col. 6, l. 34-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Beier and its circuitry to have the repositionable guide member taught by Perkins which can be configured based on the thickness of the sheet, as this enables sheets of varying thicknesses to be run without requiring the size of the rolls within the apparatus to be changed (Perkins: col. 6, l. 34-59).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHLOMIT CHELST whose telephone number is (571)272-0832. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 8:30 am to 5:00 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, Ricardo Magallanes, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-5960. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/SHLOMIT CHELST/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/ Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights