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
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
PRINTING MARKS ON SUBSTRATE EDGE IN ORDER TO INDICATE A PROBLEM THAT OCCURRED DURING PRINTING.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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: printing assembly and stacking assembly in claim 1.
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 § 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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8-10, 16, 17 and 23-25is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noy (US Pub 2010/0141985) in view of Weilacher (US Pub 2008/0053327).
Re claim 1: (Original) Noy discloses a system, comprising:
a printing assembly (interpretation: a digital printing system comprises a printing assembly having an image forming station configured to apply droplets of printing fluids (e.g., jetting ink droplets) to a surface of a movable closed loop of a flexible intermediate transfer member (ITM), also referred to herein as a blanket, for producing an image thereon, which is taught on page 5. This interpretation and its equivalents are utilized for this claim term hereinafter in the Office Action.), which is configured to print: (i) multiple images on multiple respective substrates, and (ii) multiple marks on one or more edges of the multiple respective substrates (e.g. the system discloses a printer that prints on multiple sheets of paper and prints an edge banner on one or more sheets of one or more jobs, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30].); and
[0027] Reference is now made to FIGS. 1A and 1B, which are simplified conceptual illustrations of a system for separating print jobs, constructed and operative in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention. In FIG. 1A a print job request, identified for illustration purposes as "Print Job #1", is sent from a computer 100 to a document printer 102 via a communications medium 104, such as a computer network. Printer 102 then prints the job, the top sheet of which is alternatively shown at reference numeral 106. Printer 102 prints a banner 108 on top sheet 106 such that banner 108 reaches one or more edges of top sheet 106, such as the top or side edges. Banner 108 may span the length of an edge of top sheet 106, and/or may be printed in black or any other color or color combination. Banner 108 may incorporate a display area 110 in which printer 102 may print matter such as information identifying the print job, the requestor, or any other information, including information that is normally printed on a separator page.
[0028] In FIG. 1B two additional print job requests, identified for illustration purposes as "Print Job #2" and "Print Job #3", are sent from a computer 112 and a computer 114 respectively to printer 102. Printer 102 then prints the jobs, printing banner 108 on the top sheet of each print job as described above. The stacked output of Print Jobs #1, #2, and #3 is alternatively shown at reference numeral 116. When stack 116 is viewed on edge, sheets having banners 108 may be clearly discerned, in which case each print job may be easily found without flipping through each page in the stack.
[0029] Printer 102 is capable of borderless printing, and may allow a page-bleed offset to be specified to allow printing to the edge of the paper. A raster graphic with matter to be printed in display area 110 may be sent with the data to be printed. Printer 102 may thus bleed-print banner 108 at the edge of each top sheet 106.
[0030] Reference is now made to FIGS. 2A, which is a simplified conceptual illustration of an alternate print job separation protocol for use with the system of FIGS. 1A and 1B, operative in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention. In FIG. 2A, instead of printing a banner only on the top sheet of each print job, printer 102 (FIG. 1A) prints a banner 200 at the edge of each sheet in a print job such that the location of banner 200 along the edge of each sheet is the same within a print job, but differs from print job to print job. Banner 200 does not extend the entire length of an edge that it reaches, but is sufficiently dimensioned such that each print job in a stack 202 of multiple print jobs may be individually discerned when stack 202 is viewed on edge.
a stacking assembly (interpretation: a stacking assembly, configured to stack the sheets, who received the respective images, in the output stack, which is on page 5. This interpretation and its equivalents are utilized for this claim term hereinafter in the Office Action.), which is configured to stack the multiple respective substrates on top of one another to form a stack having a top surface parallel to one or more of the substrates, and sides made from the stacked edges of the substrates (e.g. as seen in figure 1B, multiple sheets are stacked on top of one another with a top sheet in parallel with a number of different sheets. The sides are stacked even with one another as well in order to see the banner from the side, which is taught in ¶ [28] above.),
wherein, one or more of the marks are visible on a side-view of at least a given side of the sides (e.g. as seen in figure 1B and 2A, different banners can be seen from the side of the sheets, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of and wherein at least a position of the one or more marks in the side view of the given side, is indicative of a problem that occurred while printing one or more of the multiple images.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Weilacher. Similar to the primary reference, Weilacher discloses printing on an edge of a sheet (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Weilacher discloses and wherein at least a position of the one or more marks in the side view of the given side, is indicative of a problem that occurred while printing one or more of the multiple images (e.g. the system discloses printing a position or a mark on the side of the page that indicates an event or a defect found during the printing process. This is taught in ¶ [30], [31], [34] and [35].).
[0030] Referring now to FIG. 1, a method of identifying certain sheets within a stack of printed sheets (for, counting, sorting, or further evaluation/inspection) is shown in flowchart form. In one embodiment, the method comprises printing non-test production printing job(s) on sheets of media (item 100) and outputting the printed sheets into a stack of sheets (item 102). The method monitors the printing of the non-test production printing jobs in item 104 and, upon the occurrence of a "predetermined event" during the monitoring, causes the printing in item 100 to add a unique marking at an edge region of the next printed sheet (of the non-test production printing jobs) being printed to create an identifier sheet from one of the sheets of the non-test production printing jobs. The identifier sheet is then output to the stack of sheets with the other sheets of the non-test production print job in item 102.
[0031] During the remainder of the printing of the non-test production print job, the method continues the printing of the sheets and the monitoring as shown by the arrow running from item 104 to item 100. After the printing is completed, the identifier sheet can be subjected to specific inspection or can be used to indicate a specific sheet count within the stack of sheets as shown by item 106. Then, the stack of sheets can be subjected to subsequent processing such as trimming and binding, wherein the trimming process removes the edge region from the printed sheets as shown by item 108.
[0034] The "monitoring" process in item 104 can comprise many different activities from quality monitoring to sheet number counting. Thus, in one embodiment, the "monitoring" process 104 comprises counting the number of printed sheets and the "event" comprises a predetermined number of sheets being printed from the start of the printing process or from the printing of the most recent identifier sheet. For example, an identifier sheet having the edge marking can be output at every 50th sheet, every 100th sheet, every 200th sheet, etc., or can be output at the end of every job or sub-job. Thus, embodiments herein can add the edge marking to any printing sheet being printed to create an identifier sheet whenever necessary to alert the printer technician of different items or amounts that are within the output stack of sheets.
[0035] Similarly, the monitoring 104 can comprise observing the image quality of the printed sheets and the "event" can comprise the image quality being outside of a predetermined normal range. Also, the monitoring 104 can comprise monitoring parameters of a printer performing the printing (e.g., ink or toner levels, temperatures, sensors, etc.) and the "event" can comprise a parameter being out of a predetermined normal range. The image quality and the parameters of the printer can be monitored automatically and/or manually. Therefore, embodiments herein allow the printer itself to automatically produce identifier sheets whenever preset parameters are exceeded, and also allow the printer technician to manually add edge markings to the sheets being printed to create identifier sheets that are then sent to the output to the stack. Note, that there may be a slight delay (of one or more sheets) before the edge marking may be added because the quality monitoring is performed on sheets that have already been printed and the edge marking is added to sheets that are being printed after the quality defect is detected. Therefore, the technician must inspect not only the sheets to which the edge marking has been added, but also a few sheets ahead of the one or ones to which the markings were added.
Therefore, in view of Weilacher, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of and wherein at least a position of the one or more marks in the side view of the given side, is indicative of a problem that occurred while printing one or more of the multiple images, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to print a marking to indicate a problem with the printing, which allow for easier detection of improperly printed sheets (as stated in Weilacher ¶ [41]).
Re claim 2: (Original) Noy discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the images comprise first and second images, the marks comprise first and second marks, and the substrates comprise first and second substrates (e.g. as seen in figure 1B and 2A, there can be several banner images on several sheets printed for view, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.), respectively,
wherein: (i) on the first substrate, the first image is printed at an intended position and the first mark is printed at a first edge position on a given edge of the edges (e.g. on a first sheet, the system can print a marking on the side edge associated with the first print job. The intended position can be the actual position. The printing of the marking is taught in ¶ [27]-[30].), and
(ii) on the second substrate, the second image is printed at an actual position and the second mark is printed on the given edge at a second edge position (e.g. the second image printed on an edge of a second sheet can be in another position that is associated with another print job different than the first print job. This is taught in ¶ [27]-[30].).
Re claim 8: (Currently amended) Noy discloses the system according to claim 1, and comprising a processor, which is configured to receive a side-view image of the side view (e.g. the processor within the printer is able to contain a side view in order to perform banner printing on the side of the sheet, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above. Although a processor is not specifically mentioned, it is inherent to the printer.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of a processor to identify the problem based on at least the position of the one or more marks in the side-view image.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Weilacher. Similar to the primary reference, Weilacher discloses printing on an edge of a sheet (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Weilacher discloses comprising a processor to identify the problem based on at least the position of the one or more marks in the side-view image (e.g. a controller is used to identify a predetermined event and indicate the problem based on the position of the marks printed on the side view image on the sheet, which is taught in ¶ [30], [31], [34] and [35] above.).
Therefore, in view of Weilacher, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of comprising a processor to identify the problem based on at least the position of the one or more marks in the side-view image, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to print a marking to indicate a problem with the printing, which allow for easier detection of improperly printed sheets (as stated in Weilacher ¶ [41]).
Re claim 9: (Original) Noy discloses the system according to claim 8, wherein, before printing the multiple marks, the processor is configured to define one or more properties of the multiple marks intended to be printed on the one or more edges (e.g. the system determines whether the marks are a certain color, associated with a certain job and if the banner marks signify a characteristic associated with the user or company. This is taught in ¶ [27]-[32] above.).
Re claim 10: (Original) Noy discloses the system according to claim 9, wherein the one or more properties comprise at least one of: (i) the position of the one or more marks in the side view, (ii) a size of the one or more marks in the side view, and (iii) a color of the one or more marks in the side view (e.g. the color or position of the marks can be determined in the system, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[32] above.).
11-15. (Canceled)
Re claim 16: (Original) Noy discloses a method, comprising:
printing: (i) multiple images on multiple respective substrates, and (ii) multiple marks on one or more edges of the multiple respective substrates (e.g. the system discloses a printer that prints on multiple sheets of paper and prints an edge banner on one or more sheets of one or more jobs, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.); and
stacking the multiple respective substrates on top of one another to form a stack having a top surface parallel to one or more of the substrates, and sides made from the stacked edges of the substrates (e.g. as seen in figure 1B, multiple sheets are stacked on top of one another with a top sheet in parallel with a number of different sheets. The sides are stacked even with one another as well in order to see the banner from the side, which is taught in ¶ [28] above.),
wherein, one or more of the marks are visible on a side-view of at least a given side of the sides (e.g. as seen in figure 1B and 2A, different banners can be seen from the side of the sheets, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of and identifying a problem that occurred while printing one or more of the multiple images, based on at least a position of the one or more marks in the side view of the given side, which is indicative of the problem.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Weilacher. Similar to the primary reference, Weilacher discloses printing on an edge of a sheet (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Weilacher discloses and identifying a problem that occurred while printing one or more of the multiple images, based on at least a position of the one or more marks in the side view of the given side, which is indicative of the problem (e.g. the system discloses printing a position or a mark on the side of the page that indicates an event or a defect found during the printing process. This is taught in ¶ [30], [31], [34] and [35] above.).
Therefore, in view of Weilacher, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of and identifying a problem that occurred while printing one or more of the multiple images, based on at least a position of the one or more marks in the side view of the given side, which is indicative of the problem, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to print a marking to indicate a problem with the printing, which allow for easier detection of improperly printed sheets (as stated in Weilacher ¶ [41]).
Re claim 17: (Original) Noy discloses the method according to claim 16, wherein the images comprise first and second images, the marks comprise first and second marks, and the substrates comprise first and second substrates (e.g. as seen in figure 1B and 2A, there can be several banner images on several sheets printed for view, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.), respectively,
wherein: (i) on the first substrate, the first image is printed at an intended position and the first mark is printed at a first edge position on a given edge of the edges (e.g. on a first sheet, the system can print a marking on the side edge associated with the first print job. The intended position can be the actual position. The printing of the marking is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.), and
(ii) on the second substrate, the second image is printed at an actual position and the second mark is printed on the given edge at a second edge position (e.g. the second image printed on an edge of a second sheet can be in another position that is associated with another print job different than the first print job. This is taught in ¶ [27]-[30].).
Re claim 23: (Currently amended) Noy discloses the method according to claim 16 and comprising receiving a side-view image of the side view (e.g. the processor within the printer is able to contain a side view in order to perform banner printing on the side of the sheet, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above. Although a processor is not specifically mentioned, it is inherent to the printer.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of and identifying the problem based on at least the position of the one or more marks in the side-view image.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Weilacher. Similar to the primary reference, Weilacher discloses printing on an edge of a sheet (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Weilacher discloses and identifying the problem based on at least the position of the one or more marks in the side-view image (e.g. a controller is used to identify a predetermined event and indicate the problem based on the position of the marks printed on the side view image on the sheet, which is taught in ¶ [30], [31], [34] and [35] above.).
Therefore, in view of Weilacher, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of comprising and identifying the problem based on at least the position of the one or more marks in the side-view image, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to print a marking to indicate a problem with the printing, which allow for easier detection of improperly printed sheets (as stated in Weilacher ¶ [41]).
Re claim 24: (Original) Noy discloses the method according to claim 23, and comprising, before printing the multiple marks, defining one or more properties of the multiple marks intended to be printed on the one or more edges (e.g. the system determines whether the marks are a certain color, associated with a certain job and if the banner marks signify a characteristic associated with the user or company. This is taught in ¶ [27]-[32] above.).
Re claim 25: (Original) Noy discloses the method according to claim 24, wherein the one or more properties comprise at least one of: (i) the position of the one or more marks in the side view, (ii) a size of the one or more marks in the side view, and (iii) a color of the one or more marks in the side view (e.g. the color or position of the marks can be determined in the system, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[32] above.).
26-30. (Canceled)
Claim(s) 3-7 and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noy, as modified by Weilacher, as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Kayama (JP Pub 2000-137595).
Re claim 3: (Original) However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of the system according to claim 2, wherein the problem comprises an offset between the intended position and the actual position, and
wherein, in the side- view image, a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the offset between the actual position and the intended position.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein the problem comprises an offset between the intended position and the actual position, and wherein, in the side- view image, a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the offset between the actual position and the intended position (e.g. the invention discloses multiple image surfaces with marking data. The marking data of the surface is considered as the intended and the skew other surface is considered as the actual. The system detects a difference between the two surfaces to estimate the offset, which is seen in ¶ [32] and [33]. These image views can be seen from a side. Applying this concept to the above combination would perform the features of the claim.).
[0032]The marking position specification unit 25 specifies the position of the marking in the front surface raster data (front surface marking position) and the position of the marking in the back surface raster data (back surface marking position) by pattern matching as described later, and outputs the front surface marking position and the back surface marking position to the deviation amount detection unit 26.[0033]The deviation amount detection unit 26 detects a relative deviation amount of the marking position by comparing the front surface marking position and the back surface marking position. Then, the detected shift amount is sent to the shift amount correction unit 27.
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the problem comprises an offset between the intended position and the actual position, and wherein, in the side- view image, a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the offset between the actual position and the intended position, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 4: (Original) Noy discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the first image comprises a first color image of a first color and a second color image of a second color, different from the first color (e.g. several different colors can be used to print a banner edge marking on the sheets of paper that can be associated with different jobs, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.),
wherein the first mark comprises: (i) a first color mark associated with the first color image and located at a first color position (e.g. the first color is located at a first position that is correlated to the first job, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above, [31] and [32].), and
[0031] Reference is now made to FIG. 2B, which is a simplified conceptual illustration of an alternate print job separation protocol for use with the system of FIGS. 1A and 1B, operative in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention. The protocol of FIG. 2B is substantially similar to that of FIG. 2A with the notable exception that multiple copies of the same document within a single print job may be printed with a banner 204 that is in addition to and spaced apart from banner 200 and that acts as a copy separator. Banner 204 is printed at an edge of each sheet of each copy within a print job such that the location of banner 204 along the edge of each sheet is the same within a copy, but differs from copy to copy within the print job. Thus, each copy within a print job in a stack 206 of multiple print jobs, one or more of which has multiple copies of the same document, may be individually discerned when stack 206 is viewed on edge.
[0032] It is appreciated that the invention, including any of the embodiments described hereinabove, may be adapted for separating and categorizing printouts by user, priority, security level, department, or any other criteria, such as by using banners of different colors to indicate each category.
(ii) a second color mark associated with the second color image and located at a second color position different from the first color position (e.g. a second job can have a second banner at another location different from the first job banner location and a different color can be used, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of wherein the problem comprises a registration error between the first and second color images, and wherein, in the side-view image, a distance between the first and second color positions is indicative of the registration error between the first and second color images.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein the problem comprises a registration error between the first and second color images, and wherein, in the side-view image, a distance between the first and second color positions is indicative of the registration error between the first and second color images (e.g. the images are scanned and printed onto a sheet. The system determines whether the initial image is aligned with a second image. If the two are misaligned, this creates a slight skew, which can represent a slight shift in the raster data when scanned. The system detects the first marking alignment with the second marking alignment to determine the skew, which is indicative of a registration error between the images containing the markings. The deviation found is discussed in ¶ [32] and [33] above. The positional deviation between sheets that are fed and scanned is taught in ¶ [58]-[61].).
[0058]In this manner, by specifying the positions of the markings corresponding to the same positions on both the front and back surfaces of the print media 4 in the steps S25 and S26, it is possible to appropriately detect the positional deviation in the subsequent process (step S27).[0059]Next, in step S27, the deviation amount detection unit 26 obtains the relative deviation amount between the front surface raster data Da and the back surface raster data Db based on the front surface marking position and the back surface marking position.[0060]For example, in the step S25, it is specified that the position of the marking M1 included in the front surface raster data Da is located at the (x1) - th pixel in the X direction and located at the (y1) - th pixel in the Y direction as illustrated in FIG. 8. Further, it is assumed that, in the step S26, it is specified that the position of the marking M3 included in the back surface raster data Db is located at the (x2) th pixel in the X direction and located at the (y2) th pixel in the Y direction as illustrated in FIG. 10. The shift amount detection unit 26 obtains the shift amount generated in the X direction by comparing the x1 and the x2 (to be specific, by deriving the differences), and obtains the shift amount generated in the Y direction by comparing the y1 and the y2 (to be specific, by deriving the differences).[0061]That is, the shift amount detection unit 26 can obtain the shift amounts Δ X and Δ Y by performing calculations of "Δ X = x2 - x1" and "Δ Y = y2 - y1". Then, the deviation amount detection unit 26 sends the relative deviation amount between the front surface raster data Da and the back surface raster data Db to the deviation amount correction unit 27.
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the problem comprises a registration error between the first and second color images, and wherein, in the side-view image, a distance between the first and second color positions is indicative of the registration error between the first and second color images, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 5: (Original) However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of the system according to claim 2, wherein the problem comprises a movement of the second substrate relative to the second image, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions in the side- view image, is indicative of the movement.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein the problem comprises a movement of the second substrate relative to the second image, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions in the side- view image, is indicative of the movement (e.g. the second image associated with another substrate is detected to have a slight deviation from the alignment of a first marking on a first substrate. The different in the markings on each surface is indicative of the movement of the second sheet form the ideal position. This is taught in ¶ [32] [33] and [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the problem comprises a movement of the second substrate relative to the second image, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions in the side- view image, is indicative of the movement, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 6: (Original) However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of the system according to claim 5, wherein the movement comprises a rotation of the second substrate about an axis orthogonal to the top surface.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein the movement comprises a rotation of the second substrate about an axis orthogonal to the top surface (e.g. the second surface marking rotates around a surface about an axis that is orthogonal to the top surface facing vertically up. The rotation or skew of the image is discussed in ¶ [32], [33] and [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the movement comprises a rotation of the second substrate about an axis orthogonal to the top surface, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 7: (Original) Noy discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the first image is printed on the first substrate using a first printing job, and the second image is intended to be printed on the second substrate using a second printing job, different from the first printing job (e.g. as seen in figure 2a, a first image can be printed on a first set of sheets for a first job and a second image associated with a second job can be printed on a second set of sheets. The banners can be printed in different positions to indicate the first print job and the second print jobs, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of wherein the problem comprises an operational error of using the first printing job for printing the second image on the second substrate, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the operational error.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein the problem comprises an operational error of using the first printing job for printing the second image on the second substrate, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the operational error (e.g. the different pages scanned can represent two printing jobs when printed. The alignment marks on each page are on the edge of the page. The first page edge alignment marks are compared to the second print job pages alignment marks. A slight skew is detected based on the different between the edge positions of the alignment marks, which is taught in ¶ [32], [33] and [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the problem comprises an operational error of using the first printing job for printing the second image on the second substrate, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the operational error, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 18: (Original) However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of the method according to claim 17, wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying an offset between the intended position and the actual position, and wherein, in the side-view image, a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the offset between the actual position and the intended position.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying an offset between the intended position and the actual position, and wherein, in the side-view image, a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the offset between the actual position and the intended position (e.g. the invention discloses multiple image surfaces with marking data. The marking data of the surface is considered as the intended and the skew other surface is considered as the actual. The system detects a difference between the two surfaces to estimate the offset, which is seen in ¶ [32] and [33] above. These image views can be seen from a side. Applying this concept to the above combination would perform the features of the claim.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying an offset between the intended position and the actual position, and wherein, in the side-view image, a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the offset between the actual position and the intended position, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 19: (Original) Noy discloses the method according to claim 17, wherein printing the first image comprises printing a first color image of a first color and a second color image of a second color, different from the first color (e.g. several different colors can be used to print a banner edge marking on the sheets of paper that can be associated with different jobs, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.),
wherein printing the first mark comprises printing: (i) a first color mark associated with the first color image and located at a first color position (e.g. the first color is located at a first position that is correlated to the first job, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[32] above.), and
(ii) a second color mark associated with the second color image and located at a second color position different from the first color position (e.g. a second job can have a second banner at another location different from the first job banner location and a different color can be used, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying a registration error between the first and second color images, and wherein, in the side-view image, a distance between the first and second color positions is indicative of the registration error between the first and second color images.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying a registration error between the first and second color images, and wherein, in the side-view image, a distance between the first and second color positions is indicative of the registration error between the first and second color images (e.g. the images are scanned and printed onto a sheet. The system determines whether the initial image is aligned with a second image. If the two are misaligned, this creates a slight skew, which can represent a slight shift in the raster data when scanned. The system detects the first marking alignment with the second marking alignment to determine the skew, which is indicative of a registration error between the images containing the markings. The deviation found is discussed in ¶ [32] and [33] above. The positional deviation between sheets that are fed and scanned is taught in ¶ [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying a registration error between the first and second color images, and wherein, in the side-view image, a distance between the first and second color positions is indicative of the registration error between the first and second color images, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 20: (Original) However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of the method according to claim 17, wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying a movement of the second substrate relative to the second image, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions in the side-view image, is indicative of the movement.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying a movement of the second substrate relative to the second image, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions in the side-view image, is indicative of the movement (e.g. the second image associated with another substrate is detected to have a slight deviation from the alignment of a first marking on a first substrate. The different in the markings on each surface is indicative of the movement of the second sheet form the ideal position. This is taught in ¶ [32] [33] and [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying a movement of the second substrate relative to the second image, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions in the side-view image, is indicative of the movement, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 21: (Original) However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of the method according to claim 20, wherein the movement comprises a rotation of the second substrate about an axis orthogonal to the top surface.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein the movement comprises a rotation of the second substrate about an axis orthogonal to the top surface (e.g. the second surface marking rotates around a surface about an axis that is orthogonal to the top surface facing vertically up. The rotation or skew of the image is discussed in ¶ [32], [33] and [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the movement comprises a rotation of the second substrate about an axis orthogonal to the top surface, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Re claim 22: (Original) Noy discloses the method according to claim 17, wherein the first image is printed on the first substrate using a first printing job, and the second image is intended to be printed on the second substrate using a second printing job, different from the first printing job (e.g. as seen in figure 2a, a first image can be printed on a first set of sheets for a first job and a second image associated with a second job can be printed on a second set of sheets. The banners can be printed in different positions to indicate the first print job and the second print jobs, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
However, Noy fails to specifically teach the features of wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying an operational error of using the first printing job for printing the second image on the second substrate, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the operational error.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kayama. Similar to the primary reference, Kayama discloses detecting movement between different positions (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kayama discloses wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying an operational error of using the first printing job for printing the second image on the second substrate, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the operational error (e.g. the different pages scanned can represent two printing jobs when printed. The alignment marks on each page are on the edge of the page. The first page edge alignment marks are compared to the second print job pages alignment marks. A slight skew is detected based on the different between the edge positions of the alignment marks, which is taught in ¶ [32], [33] and [58]-[61] above.).
Therefore, in view of Kayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein identifying the problem comprises identifying an operational error of using the first printing job for printing the second image on the second substrate, and wherein a difference between the first and second edge positions is indicative of the operational error, incorporated in the device of Noy, in order to determine a deviation between images to eliminate misalignment, which can improve the use and productivity of the printer (as stated in Kayama ¶ [10]-[12]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Simon Tov discloses changing or shifting an image.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD S DICKERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM 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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached at 571-270-5254. 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.
/CHAD DICKERSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights