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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because drawings 7-9 disclose the opposite of the specification. The drawings show in steps 720, 820 and 920 “is there error regarding printing paper?” when the error is YES printing paper and when the error is NO stop printing. The specification describes the opposite, that where the error is YES stop printing and when the error is NO to print. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 7-8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conzelmann (US 2016/0052313 A1) in view of OI et al. (US 2009/0224020 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Conzelmann’313 shows a printing apparatus (Figure 1 printer 1) for performing printing on printing paper in which a plurality of labels constituting a printing area are sequentially arranged and mounted to be retractable in a wound state (paragraph [0021] print medium 3 is a label roll 33 ) and a bar pattern corresponding to paper information is formed on at least one of the plurality of labels (paragraph [0006] the label roll has a backing strip where a 2D code is applied, paragraph [0008] the 2D code comprises material-specific data, paragraph [0037] the 2D code contains print media identification), the printing apparatus comprising:
an input/output interface configured to receive user input and transmit and receive data to and from an external device (paragraph [0023] control device 2 is provided in order to control the printer. The control device is connected to a merchandise management system 5 and/or further printers by means of an interface 21);
a printer configured to perform printing on the printing paper;
a sensor configured to recognize [ ] and bar patterns formed on the printing paper (paragraph [0040] the printer reads the 2D code and extract the contained data );
storage configured to store paper information corresponding to a bar pattern recognized by the sensor and store a program for performing a printing operation based on the paper information (paragraph [0040] read the 2D code, extract data and stores the data); and
a controller including at least one processor (paragraph [0023] control device 2);
wherein the controller, by executing the program, collects the paper information by recognizing the bar pattern while feeding the printing paper, detects an error based on the collected paper information, and does not perform a printing operation when an error is detected (paragraph [0047] shows control device carries out a plausibility check, control device 2 can compare the data of the label format stored in the 2D code with the data of the print layout. In the case of discrepancies between the data, the control device 2 issues an error message or stops the printing operation) and
performs a printing operation when an error is not detected (paragraph [0014] good and/or material-protecting printing result is obtained when the code contains print-specific data and the control device controls the print head and/or the feed motion of the print medium in accordance with these print-specific data, paragraph [0047] is understood that when no errors printing occurs).
Conzelmann’313 does not specifically show a sensor configured to recognize black marks formed on the printing paper.
OI’020 shows a sensor configured to recognize black marks formed on the printing paper (paragraph [0051] shows black index marks 12d index marks 12d are printed at the position of the label 12c).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Conzelmann’313 to include a sensor configured to recognize black marks formed on the printing paper method taught by OI’020. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to determine he type of material and color of the liner 12b and label 12c, and the length of the label 12c in the transportation direction. Whether index marks 12d are present and the distance between the index marks 12d can also be determined (paragraphs [0058]-[0059]).
With respect to Claim 2, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sensor comprises a black mark sensor (in OI’020: photosensors 26 and 27 ) and a bar pattern sensor (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0025] sensor 24) that are arranged alongside each other based on a widthwise direction perpendicular to a direction in which the printing paper is transferred and that include respective optical sensors that recognize the black marks and the bar patterns, respectively (in OI’020: paragraph [0055] two sensors are disposed in this order from the downstream side to the upstream side in the transportation direction).
With respect to Claim 3, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 2, wherein the black mark sensor and the bar pattern sensor are arranged in bilateral symmetry so that light emission parts of the black mark sensor and the bar pattern sensor are adjacent to each other and light reception parts thereof are arranged far away from each other (in OI’020: paragraph [0055] and figure 3, 4A-B ).
With respect to Claim 4, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sensor is disposed in front of the printer so that the printing paper reaches the printer after having been transferred to the sensor based on a direction in which the printing paper is transferred, and is configured to come into contact with a rear surface of the printing paper (in OI’020: figure 3 sensors 26 and 27).
With respect to Claim 5, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller detects whether a printing paper change event has occurred, recognizes the bar patterns while feeding the printing paper when the printing paper change event has occurred, collects paper information by converting the recognized bar pattern into a character string, and determines that the printing paper change event has occurred when the printing apparatus is turned on or a cover of the printing apparatus is opened or closed (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0012] A printer flap is provided which must be opened when a print medium is inserted or removed (event). The printer flap thus covers a print media holder. The control device initiates a read operation of the code data when the printer flap is opened or closed).
With respect to Claim 7, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein, when the error is detected, the input/output interface outputs an occurrence of the error as a visual or auditory alarm or reports it to a host apparatus connected to the printing apparatus (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0047] issues an error message).
With respect to Claim 8, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller sequentially collects successive paper information corresponding to a plurality of bar patterns sequentially arranged among the bar patterns formed on the printing paper, and detects the error based on the successive paper information (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0024] The control unit sets or updates the paper information in the storage unit when the communication unit receives the command from the external device, and the control unit acquires the corresponding paper information as a result of the transportation unit conveying the paper when the paper detector detects the paper-loaded state and determines if the paper matches the paper information in the storage unit).
With respect to Claim 10, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller feeds the printing paper, recognizes the bar pattern while performing a printing operation, and, when an error is detected in the paper information corresponding to the recognized bar pattern, stops the printing operation (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0047] shows control device carries out a plausibility check, control device 2 can compare the data of the label format stored in the 2D code with the data of the print layout. In the case of discrepancies between the data, the control device 2 issues an error message or stops the printing operation).
With respect to Claim 11, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the sensor further comprises a paper width detection sensor configured to detect a width of the printing paper (OI’020: paragraph [0055] detect the width of the recording medium); and the controller detects the error when a type of printing paper included in the paper information and the width of the printing paper detected by the paper width detection sensor do not correspond to each other (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0047] shows control device carries out a plausibility check, control device 2 can compare the data of the label format stored in the 2D code with the data of the print layout. In the case of discrepancies between the data, the control device 2 issues an error message or stops the printing operation).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conzelmann (US 2016/0052313 A1) in view of OI et al. (US 2009/0224020 A1) further in view of Sugiyama et al. (US 5740028).
With respect to Claim 6, the combination of Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 shows the printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller detects the error when the paper information is not a valid value, when a type of printing paper included in the paper information does not correspond to a type of printing paper preset in the printing apparatus (in Conzelmann’313: paragraph [0047] shows control device carries out a plausibility check, control device 2 can compare the data of the label format stored in the 2D code with the data of the print layout. In the case of discrepancies between the data, the control device 2 issues an error message or stops the printing operation), [ ].
Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 does not show when a usable period of the printing paper has expired based on manufacturing date or expiration date information included in the paper information, or when the type of printing paper included in the paper information and a width of the printing paper detected do not correspond to each other.
Sugiyama’028 shows when a usable period of the printing paper has expired based on manufacturing date or expiration date information included in the paper information, or when the type of printing paper included in the paper information and a width of the printing paper detected do not correspond to each other (column 2, lines 14-19 having a print error, Column 56, lines 19-25 print error happening when printing paper is expired).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Conzelmann’313 and OI’020 to include a usable period of the printing paper has expired based on manufacturing date or expiration date information included in the paper information, or when the type of printing paper included in the paper information and a width of the printing paper detected do not correspond to each other method taught by Sugiyama’028. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to have greater improvement in efficiency with detection of error and ways to fix the error (column 64, lines 40-52).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 12-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Isaak et al. (US 2018/0326753 A1) shows in paragraph [0057] The identification 11 of the print object 6 can likewise be made as a bar code identification, as is the case in the exemplary embodiment according to FIG. 3. Here a US material is shown as the print object 6 in which there is moreover a second identification 11′ which is located parallel to the first identification 11 on the print object 6, the two bar code identifications 11, 11′ being arranged turned by 180° to one another. There are two optical sensors 10 next to one another for simultaneous redundant detection of the two bar code identifications 11, 11′ in the housing 2 of the printer 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRIANA CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3246. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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.
/IRIANA CRUZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights