DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The subject matter of this application admits of illustration by a drawing to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. 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).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the printing position,” “the effective range of the printing unit” and “the corresponding locking means” lack antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “its opposite ends” lack antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claim recites wherein first and second holding means are brought “into the printing position,” but seeing as how two holding means occupy different spaces, it is not clear how two distinct components could be brought into a single position. Further, the claim recites “the corresponding locking means,” but four locking means have been recited, and it is not clear as to exactly which of the four the corresponding locking means” is intended to refer. The claim recites “a material web” and “the web material.” While it is understood that these are intended to refer to the same thing, the two distinct terms for the same component is nonetheless indefinite.
Clarification is required.
Because all claims depend from claim 1, they are also rejected on this basis.
Note that the lack of drawings coupled with the broad use of “means” within the claims leave Examiner without a concrete understanding of the invention. The best prior art has been asserted below given the lack of clarity provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Terada et al. (2005/0002005).
Regarding claim 1, Terada teaches a printing system (fig. 1, item 10) with a base body (fig. 1, everything shown except for exposure heads 100) and a printing unit (figs. 7, exposure unit 100) for printing a material web ([0199], note that paper can be said to constitute a web) by ejecting ink drops ([0199], note that replacing the exposure heads 100 with a printhead, the inkjet limitations would be met), which printing unit is arranged spaced relative to the base body (see figs. 1-7), as well as a first and a second holding means,
wherein the first or second holding means (fig. 1, items 20A, 20B), when brought into the printing position, allows positioning of the material web within the effective range of the printing unit (see figs. 1-7),
wherein the base body comprises a support frame (figs. 1-7, item 12, 14), on which means (fig. 1, note rails 56, 58, 62, 64) are mounted for transporting the material web into and out of the effective range of the printing unit (see figs. 1-7), the body is configured such that the first holding means can be moved between a printing position within the effective range of the printing unit, in which the first holding means can be blocked against movement by first and third locking means (see figs. 1-7, note that any number of components could be said to “block” the movement of the holding members when they are stationary. That is, any other stationary component in the entire drive system could be said to “block movement” simply by remaining stationary), and a first rest position within the base body (see fig. 1, note that each of the holding means 20A, 20B can be moved into proximity with heads 100 and out of proximity, and the printing position is being taken to be directly under the heads, and the rest position is being taken as anywhere else in the travel path of the holding means), and that the second holding means can be moved between a printing position within the effective range of the printing unit, in which the second holding means can be blocked against movement by second and fourth locking means (see figs. 1-7, note that any number of components could be said to “block” the movement of the holding members when they are stationary. That is, any other stationary component in the entire drive system could be said to “block movement” simply by remaining stationary), and a second rest position within the base body (see fig. 1, note that each of the holding means 20A, 20B can be moved into proximity with heads 100 and out of proximity, and the printing position is being taken to be directly under the heads, and the rest position is being taken as anywhere else in the travel path of the holding means),
wherein during printing of the material web with the printing unit, the first or the second holding means is brought into the printing position and blocked against movement by the corresponding locking means (see figs. 1-7).
Regarding claim 2, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 1, the first holding means in the printing position can be blocked against movement by first locking means attached to the support frame, which are designed to engage third locking means attached to the first holding means, and that the second holding means in the printing position can be blocked against movement by second locking means attached to the support frame, which are designed to engage fourth locking means attached to the second holding means (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claim 1. Again, note that “block movement” has not been defined. Here, the holding means are both blocked from movement when they are stationary by all of the other components that would otherwise be driving their movements).
Regarding claim 3, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 1, the base body comprises two parallel guide rails (figs. 1-7, items 56, 58) that carry the second holding means at its opposite ends (see figs. 1-7), and that extend at least partially outside the effective range of the printing unit under an angle in the range of 10 degrees to 35 degrees downwards and in or against the transport direction of the material web (see figs. 1-7), such that the second holding means provided with guide elements can be moved manually or automatically along the guide rails from its printing position to the second rest position by suitable first adjustment means (see figs. 1-7), and wherein the second holding means can be moved at least substantially in the vertical between its printing position and direction the first rest position lowered relative to its printing position by means of a pneumatic or motorized lifting system (see figs. 1-7, Note that both holding means move in both the transport direction and a vertical direction).
Regarding claim 4, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 3, the guide rails extend horizontally in or against the transport direction of the material web at least in the effective range of the printing unit (see figs. 1-7).
Regarding claim 5, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 3, the guide elements comprise wheels mounted on the second holding means (see figs. 1-7).
Regarding claim 6, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 1, the first holding means is in an ink catching device and the second holding means is a suction table, or that the first holding means is a suction table and the second holding means is an ink catching device (see fig. 1, Note that “ink catching device” has not been defined in any way. Here, since either holding means might have ink fall on it, either can be considered an ink catcher. Further, note that both holding means have suction holes 30Bfor suctioning substrates).
Regarding claim 7, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 6, the ink catching device comprises an endless conveyor belt running between two deflection rollers for catching and removing ink drops passing through a mesh-like material web during printing, as well as two guide edges arranged transversely to the transport direction of the material web and on opposite sides of the conveyor belt, such that the mesh-like material web can be guided in the transport direction of the material web at a distance greater than zero from the section of the conveyor belt facing the mesh-like material web when the mesh-like material web is under tension in the transport direction, wherein the conveyor belt can be driven at least by one of the two deflection rollers, which is connected to a motor (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claims 6, 1).
Regarding claim 8, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 7, the ink catching device comprises a cleaning unit for removing ink from the conveyor belt (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claims 6, 1).
Regarding claim 9, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 8, the cleaning unit comprises a blade with a cutting edge, wherein the cleaning unit is arranged at one of the deflection rollers such that when the conveyor belt runs over at least one deflection roller and ink drops collected on the conveyor belt harden or dry, the cutting edge can scrape off hardened or dried ink drops from the conveyor belt (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claims 6, 1).
Regarding claim 10, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 3, the base body comprises at least one plate facing the printing unit in the inlet and/or outlet area of the printing unit, which at least partially encloses the effective range of the printing unit and forms an upper side of the base body, wherein the plate comprises a flap in the inlet or outlet area that can be opened away from the effective range of the printing unit, which can be moved between a closed position and an opened position, such that in the opened position access to the second rest position under the flap is provided to the second holding means, and in the closed position access to the second rest position is blocked by the flap (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claims 6, 1).
Regarding claim 11, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 7, the mesh-like material web is a mesh material web (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claims 6, 1).
Regarding claim 12, Terada teaches the printing system according to claim 2, the guide edges of the ink catching device or the surface of the suction table subjected to negative pressure, when the ink catching device or the suction table is brought into the printing position, are arranged higher than the surface of the plate facing the preferably printing unit (see figs. 1-7, rejection of claims 6, 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RICARDO MAGALLANEZ can be reached at 571-202-5960. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/A.V/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853