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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 0001, “Through applied effort, ingenuity, and innovation.” This is an incomplete sentence.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “212” has been used to designate both the “lower frame” and the “window assembly” (see paragraphs 0015-0018). 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. 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 § 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.
Claims 7, 8, and 17 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. Claims 7, 8, and 17 disclose the arcuate slot having a rest point along the arcuate slot, but this rest point is not shown in the drawings (See Figures 3 and 5) or disclosed the written description.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. US 20110058878 A1 further in view of Hirte et al. US 20050271449 A1 and Harris US 20040179058 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Maeda et al. teaches:
a printer (Paragraph 0002, “The present invention relates to a thermal printer”)
a base assembly (Figure 2, Item 20)
a lid assembly attached to the base assembly (Figure 2, Item 30), the lid assembly movable between a closed position in which the lid assembly is secured to the base assembly (Figure 2), and an open position in which the lid assembly is at least partially separated from the base assembly (Figure 11)
an arcuate slot (Figure 12a, Item 33)
a ribbon frame disposed within the printer (Figure 11, Item 40)
a ribbon frame post secured to the ribbon frame and disposed within the arcuate slot (Figure 11, Item 41b)
wherein when the lid assembly is moved to the open position, the arcuate slot lifts the ribbon frame post and causes the ribbon frame to move to a presenting position (Figure 11, Item 40)
Maeda et al. does not disclose that the lid assembly further comprises a window assembly.
However, Hirte et al. discloses a top door having a media window (Figure 1, Item 7). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maeda et al. to include a window assembly as part of the lid assembly so that an operator may visually verify the presence, type and remaining volume of loaded print ribbon and or media, as taught by Hirte et al (Paragraph 0027, “The top door 3 may include a media window 7 through which an operator may quickly visually verify the presence, type and remaining volume of loaded print ribbon and or media 9”).
Modified Maeda et al. further does not disclose that the arcuate slot is disposed on an inside surface of the window assembly.
However, Harris teaches a curved channel formed on an inside surface of a cover (Figures 1 and 2, Item 36). Because both Maeda et al. and Harris teach arcuate structures for guiding the opening/closing of a cover, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one method for the other to achieve the predictable result of providing a structure for opening/closing the cover.
Regarding claim 2, Maeda et al. teaches:
the arcuate slot has a first arcuate slot end and a second arcuate slot end such that the ribbon frame post is configured to translate within the arcuate slot from the first slot end to the second slot end (Figures 13a and 13b).
Regarding claim 4, Maeda et al. teaches:
a cavity defined between the lid assembly and the base assembly, wherein the cavity is inaccessible when the lid assembly is in the closed position and the cavity is accessible when the lid assembly is in the open position (Figures 2 and 11).
Regarding claim 5, Maeda et al. teaches:
the ribbon frame post is integral to the ribbon frame (Paragraph 0069, “Referring to FIG. 12B, the arm portion 41 is provided with… a projecting portion 41b that is inserted movably into the slit 33”; Figure 12B).
Regarding claim 6, Maeda et al. teaches:
the ribbon frame post moves from a first end of the arcuate slot when the lid assembly is in the closed position to a second end of the arcuate slot when the lid assembly is in the open position (Paragraph 0070, “Further, in the fitted state where the printing unit 40 is fitted to the upper lid portion 30, the projecting portion 41b moves to the one end portion side of the upper lid portion guide plate 31 that is fixed to the upper lid portion 30, as shown in FIG. 13A, and when the printing unit 40 is withdrawn from the upper lid portion 30 and supported independently thereof, as shown in FIG. 11, the projecting portion 41b moves to the open end side of the upper lid portion guide plate 31, as shown in FIG. 13B”; Figures 13A and 13B).
Regarding claim 7, Maeda et al. teaches:
the arcuate slot is configured to allow the ribbon frame post to move within the arcuate slot from a first end of the arcuate slot to a second end of the arcuate slot (Figures 13a and 13b).
Maeda et al. does not disclose:
the arcuate slot having a rest point along the arcuate slot between the first end of the arcuate slot and the second end of the arcuate slot wherein the ribbon frame post is configured to be stationary at the rest point relative to the arcuate slot.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maeda et al. to include a rest point along the arcuate slot between the first and second end where the ribbon frame post is configured to be stationary, as that simply entails a stopping of the opening and closing operation partway through the operation.
Regarding claim 8,
Maeda et al. does not disclose:
the ribbon frame post is stationary at the rest point, the lid assembly and the ribbon frame are also stationary.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maeda et al. to include a rest point along the arcuate slot between the first and second end where the ribbon frame post is configured to be stationary, as that simply entails a stopping of the opening and closing operation partway through the operation.
Regarding claim 9, Maeda et al. teaches:
the ribbon frame is pivotably attached to at least one of the lid assembly or the base assembly and is configured to move between a closed position when the lid assembly is in the closed position and a presenting position when the lid assembly is in the open position (Figure 12b, Item 17).
Claim(s) 11, 12, and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. US 20110058878 A1 further in view of Harris US 20040179058 A1.
Regarding claim 11, Maeda et al. teaches:
a printer (Paragraph 0002, “The present invention relates to a thermal printer”),
a ribbon frame disposed within the printer (Figure 11, Item 40),
the ribbon frame is configured to position media (Paragraph 0035, “The ink ribbon 2 is suspended between a ribbon winding shaft 14”; Figure 11, Item 14),
a ribbon frame post attached to the ribbon frame (Figure 11, Item 41b),
a lid (Figure 2, Item 30),
the ribbon frame post is disposed within the arcuate slot (Figure 11, Item 41b),
when the lid is raised the ribbon frame is configured to raise concurrently with the lid via the interaction between the ribbon frame post and the arcuate slot (Paragraph 0070, “Further, in the fitted state where the printing unit 40 is fitted to the upper lid portion 30, the projecting portion 41b moves to the one end portion side of the upper lid portion guide plate 31 that is fixed to the upper lid portion 30, as shown in FIG. 13A, and when the printing unit 40 is withdrawn from the upper lid portion 30 and supported independently thereof, as shown in FIG. 11, the projecting portion 41b moves to the open end side of the upper lid portion guide plate 31, as shown in FIG. 13B”; Figures 13A and 13B).
Maeda et al does not disclose:
an arcuate slot on an inner surface of the lid.
However, Harris teaches a curved channel formed on an inside surface of a cover (Figures 1 and 2, Item 36). Because both Maeda et al. and Harris teach arcuate structures for guiding the opening/closing of a cover, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute one method for the other to achieve the predictable result of providing a structure for opening/closing the cover.
Regarding claim 12, Maeda et al. teaches:
the arcuate slot has a first arcuate slot end and a second arcuate slot end such that the ribbon frame post is configured to translate within the arcuate slot from the first slot end to the second slot end (Figures 13a and 13b).
Regarding claim 14, Maeda et al. teaches:
a cavity defined between the lid and a base, wherein the cavity is inaccessible when the lid is in the closed position and the cavity is accessible when the lid is in the open position (Figures 2 and 11).
Regarding claim 15, Maeda et al. teaches:
the ribbon frame post is integral to the ribbon frame (Paragraph 0069, “Referring to FIG. 12B, the arm portion 41 is provided with… a projecting portion 41b that is inserted movably into the slit 33”; Figure 12B).
Regarding claim 16, Maeda et al. teaches:
the ribbon frame post moves from a first end of the arcuate slot when the lid is in the closed position to a second end of the arcuate slot when the lid is in the open position (Paragraph 0070, “Further, in the fitted state where the printing unit 40 is fitted to the upper lid portion 30, the projecting portion 41b moves to the one end portion side of the upper lid portion guide plate 31 that is fixed to the upper lid portion 30, as shown in FIG. 13A, and when the printing unit 40 is withdrawn from the upper lid portion 30 and supported independently thereof, as shown in FIG. 11, the projecting portion 41b moves to the open end side of the upper lid portion guide plate 31, as shown in FIG. 13B”; Figures 13A and 13B).
Regarding claim 17, Maeda et al. teaches:
the arcuate slot is configured to allow the ribbon frame post to move within the arcuate slot from a first end of the arcuate slot to a second end of the arcuate slot (Figures 13a and 13b).
Maeda et al. does not disclose:
the arcuate slot having a rest point along the arcuate slot between the first end of the arcuate slot and the second end of the arcuate slot wherein the ribbon frame post is configured to be stationary at the rest point relative to the arcuate slot.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maeda et al. to include a rest point along the arcuate slot between the first and second end where the ribbon frame post is configured to be stationary, as that simply entails a stopping of the opening and closing operation partway through the operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 10, and 13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The limitation disclosing that the ribbon frame post causes the ribbon frame to pivot into the open position, further by contacting a side of the arcuate slot and moving in conjunction with the arcuate slot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rami Alshoroogi whose telephone number is (571)272-8946. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am-6pm.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/RAMI A ALSHOROOGI/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights