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 .
In amendments dated 10/02/2026, applicant amended claims 1, 6, 7, 11, 16, 17; and cancelled claims 2 and 12. Claims 1, 3 – 11 and 13 – 20 are now pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
In the remarks on page 8 the applicant notes that the title have been amended to overcome the prior objections. In view of the amendments to the title the prior objections regarding the title is hereby withdrawn.
In the Remarks on page 8 the Applicant also notes that claims 6, 7, 16 and 17 have been amended to overcome the prior 35 USC §112 Second Paragraph rejections. In view of the amendments the prior 35 USC §112 Second Paragraph rejections are hereby withdrawn.
In the remarks on page 8 the applicant also notes that the claims have been clarified to the prior claim objections. In view of the clarification to the claims the prior claim objections regarding the informality is hereby withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3 - 11 and 13 - 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3 - 11 and 13 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa et el. (U.S PreGrant Publication No. 2021/0229950 A1, cited in an IDS filed on 04/15/2025, hereinafter ‘Ishikawa’) in view of Kogiso (U.S PreGrant Publication No. 2024/0126200 A1, hereinafter ‘Kogiso’).
With respect to claim 1, Ishikawa teaches an image forming apparatus (i.e., an image forming device 10, ¶0013), comprising: a first conveyance driving component configured to convey a sheet to which a wireless tag is attached in a first conveyance path for forming a first image on a first surface of the sheet (e.g., a first conveyance means (e.g. rollers or inherent motor) configured to convey a sheet to which a wireless tag is provided in a first conveyance path 33 for forming a first image on a first surface of said sheet, ¶0016, ¶0025 with ¶0035); a second conveyance driving component configured to convey the sheet in a second conveyance path for forming a second image on a second surface of the sheet (e.g., a second conveyance means (e.g., rollers or inherent motor) configured to convey said sheet in a second conveyance path 33b for forming another image on a second surface of said sheet, ¶0016, ¶0025 with ¶0035 - ¶0036); an image forming component (e.g., a printer unit 18, ¶0016) configured to form the first image with respect to the first surface of the sheet conveyed through the first conveyance path or the second image on the second surface of the sheet conveyed through the second conveyance path (e.g., configured to form the first image on first surface of said sheet conveyed via the first conveyance path 33 or another image on the second surface of said sheet conveyed via the second conveyance path 33b, ¶0016, ¶0025, ¶0034 - ¶0036); a tag communication component (e.g. a wireless communication device 201, ¶0028 - ¶0029) configured to write data or read data with respect to the wireless tag of the sheet located in the first conveyance path or the second conveyance path (e.g., capable of write or read data to/from the wireless tag of said sheet located at any conveyance path, ¶0029, ¶0037 - ¶0038); and a controller (i.e., a controller 100, ¶0039) configured to read the data from the wireless tag of the sheet after writing the data to the wireless tag of the sheet in the first conveyance path and to determine whether or not the data was normally written to the wireless tag based on the read data (e.g., capable of reading data from the wireless tag of said sheet upon writing data to the wireless tag of said sheet in said first conveyance path 33 and to determine whether or not data is successfully written to said wireless tag based on the read data, ¶0041 - ¶0051, Fig. 4), but fails to teach wherein the controller reads the data from the wireless tag of the sheet located in the first conveyance path after writing the data to the wireless tag of the sheet in the first conveyance path, and then reads the data from the wireless tag of the sheet located in the second conveyance path, and determines that the data was normally written to the wireless tag if the data read in the first conveyance path and the data read in the second conveyance path match.
However, in the same field of endeavor writing/reading data to/from wireless tag in a sheet, the mentioned claimed limitations are well-known in the art as evidence by Kogiso. Theoretically, Kogiso teaches wherein the controller reads the data from the wireless tag of the sheet located in the first conveyance path after writing the data to the wireless tag of the sheet in the first conveyance path, and then reads the data from the wireless tag of the sheet located in the same first conveyance path (process again), and determines that the data was normally written to the wireless tag if the data read in the first conveyance path and the data read in same first conveyance path (processed again) match (e.g., read tag (ACT 17) of a print media (sheet) in a conveyance path after writing tag (ACT 16) in said conveyance path, if not complete then indirectly loop back (or process again) to ACT 15 to read the tag of the printing media and determine that data was completely processed normally if the data read in the conveyance path and the data read in same conveyance path (process again) match, ¶0030, ¶0098, ¶0119 - ¶0120 and Fig. 7; examiner is aware that Kogiso doesn’t teach the second conveyance path is for forming a second image on a second surface, but the sheet in which is not completed properly is processed again and can be performed/implemented but for the second side/surface and the second conveyance path 33b of Ishikawa (double-sided printing)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the image forming apparatus of Ishikawa as taught by Kogiso since Kogiso suggested within ¶0030, ¶0098, ¶0119 - ¶0120 and Fig. 7 that such modification would attempt again if the tag processing is not completed normally but for the second surface of Ishikawa in which need another conveyance path.
With respect to claim 2, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller reads the data from the wireless tag of the sheet located in the first conveyance path after writing the data to the wireless tag of the sheet in the first conveyance path, and then reads the data from the wireless tag of the sheet located in the second conveyance path, and determines whether or not the data was normally written to the wireless tag based on the data read in the first conveyance path and the data read in the second conveyance path (e.g., said controller reads the data from the wireless data of said sheet within said first conveyance path 33, and then read the data from said wireless tag of said sheet by the second conveyance path 33b, and determine whether or not data was successfully written to said wireless tag based on the data read in the first conveyance path 33 and data read in the second conveyance path 33b, ¶0041 - ¶0051, Fig. 4).
With respect to claim 3, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the tag communication component is installed in a location closer to the second conveyance path than an area in which the sheet to which the wireless tag is attached is located and which is different from the second conveyance path (Fig. 1 – design choice; said wireless communication device 201 is found to be closer with the second conveyance path 33).
With respect to claim 4, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: an output component configured to output information in a manner recognizable by a user, wherein the controller outputs, from the output component, information indicating the sheet to which the wireless tag is attached if it is determined that the data was not normally written to the wireless tag if a plurality of the sheets was processed continuously (e.g., said controller 100 performs a notification that there is an error on the wireless tag 251. This notification can be provided by printing on the sheet 250 provided with the wireless tag 251. However, this notification may also or instead be a notification made by display of a message on the display unit included in the image forming device 10 or notification(s) on display units of other devices such as a personal computer connected to the image forming apparatus 10. If the third writing fails, the controller 100 may discharge the sheet 250 to a discharge tray 20 different from the discharge tray 20 to which the other sheets 250 for which the tag writing has succeeded are discharged, ¶0056).
With respect to claim 5, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller has an ordinary sheet mode and a wireless tag sheet mode (e.g., said controller controls provision of sheets between without wireless tags (e.g., ordinary sheet mode) and with wireless tags (e.g., wireless tag mode), ¶0015).
With respect to claim 6, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 5, wherein in the ordinary sheet mode, the controller picks up the sheet to be processed from a sheet feed cassette, conveys the picked-up sheet, and forms an image on the sheet by fixing a toner image by a fixing device, and discharges the sheet (e.g., conventional prior art: if the image forming apparatus is arranged to use only sheets without wireless tag stored in paper feed cassettes, then the image forming apparatus will pick said sheets from any of the paper feed cassettes and discharge the sheets, ¶0015).
With respect to claim 7, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 5, wherein in the wireless tag sheet mode, the controller picks up a wireless tag sheet from a sheet feed cassette, conveys the picked-up wireless tag sheet, and performs a writing process on the wireless tag sheet (e.g., conventional prior art: if the image forming apparatus is arranged to use only sheets with wireless tag stored in paper feed cassettes, then the image forming apparatus will pick said sheets from any of the paper feed cassettes and discharge the sheets, ¶0015).
With respect to claim 8, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 7, wherein in the wireless tag sheet mode, the controller then performs a first reading process on the wireless tag sheet, fixing a toner image by a fixing device, conveys the wireless tag sheet in which the toner image is formed, and performs a second reading process (e.g., if said image forming apparatus is arranged to use sheets with wireless tag, the controller can perform reading process on said wireless tag sheet, and performs second reading process, ¶0015 with ¶0034 - ¶0041, ¶0050).
With respect to claim 9, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a wireless tag unit controller that controls a reading component and a writing component (e.g., an antenna capable of reading and writing, ¶0029).
With respect 10, Ishikawa in view of Kogiso teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a wireless tag unit controller is configured to communicate with the controller (e.g., the antenna is controlled to communicate with said controller 100, ¶0028 - ¶0029).
With respect to claim 11, this is a method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 1. Therefore, this is rejected for the same reasons as the apparatus claim 1.
With respect to claims 13 - 20, these are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 2 – 10, respectively. Therefore, these are rejected for the same reasons as the apparatus claims 3 – 10, respectively.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN M GUILLERMETY whose telephone number is (571)270-3481. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Benny Q TIEU can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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.
/JUAN M GUILLERMETY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
