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 .
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US PG Pub 2021/0216027) in view of Ishida et al. (US PG Pub 2022/0410591).
For claim 1: Tanaka et al. teaches a charge neutralizer (see Fig. 10) comprising: a first power source 115 to output a first neutralizing bias having a first polarity; a first charge neutralizer 111 coupled to the first power source 115 to remove charge having a second polarity opposite to the first polarity of the first neutralizing bias on one face of a recording medium S (see Fig. 10, top surface). Tanaka et al. does not teach a second power source to output a second neutralizing bias having the second polarity; and a second charge neutralizer coupled to the second power source to remove charge having the first polarity on another face of the recording medium. However, Ishida et al. teaches providing a charge eliminating device 30, 31 for each of a first side and a second side of the printing substrate (see Fig. 10C). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Tanaka et al. to provide the same charge neutralization structure on both sides of the substrate by reversal of the components of Tanaka et al. to eliminate charge on both surfaces of the substrate.
For claim 2: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the charge neutralizer according to claim 1 and Ishida et al. the first charge neutralizer is disposed upstream from the second charge neutralizer in the conveyance direction of the recording medium (see Fig. 10C, providing element 30 upstream of element 31).
For claim 3: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the charge neutralizer according to claim 1 and Ishida et al. teaches that the first charge neutralizer is disposed downstream from the second charge neutralizer in the conveyance direction of the recording medium (paragraph 67, the position of the brushes may be reversed).
For claim 4: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the charge neutralizer according to claim 1 and Tanaka et al. teaches that the first power source and the second power source is a direct current bias power source to supply a constant current (see paragraph 83, the current Vd1 is direct current, the power supply is a duplicated part to generate the first and second power sources).
For claim 5: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the charge neutralizer according to claim 1 and Tanaka et al. teaches that the power source includes a direct current high power voltage source (see paragraph 83, the current Vd1 is direct current, the power supply is a duplicated part to generate the first and second power sources) and an alternate current high voltage power source Vd2 (see paragraph 86, alternating-current power source).
For claim 6: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the charge neutralizer according to claim 1 and wherein the first charge neutralizer 111 contacts one face of the recording medium to remove the charge having the second polarity opposite to the first polarity of the first neutralizing bias on the one face of the recording medium (see Fig. 10, top surface, removing the – charges), and in combination, Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches that the second charge neutralizer contacts said another face of the recording medium to remove the charge having the first polarity on said another face of the recording medium (see Ishida et al., Fig. 10, the element 31 provided on the opposite and thus contact the other face of the recording medium).
For claims 7 and 8: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the charge neutralizer of claim 1 and Tanaka et al. further teaches an image forming apparatus (see Figs. 3 and 4) comprising an image forming section 22 to form a toner image, a transfer device 57, 50 to transfer the toner image to a recording medium and a fixing device 70 to fix the toner image to the recording medium, the charge neutralizer 115, 100 disposed downstream of the fixing device. Regarding claim 8, the image forming apparatus and the downstream charge neutralizer constitute an image forming system (see Fig. 4 of Tanaka et al.).
For claim 9: The combination of Tanaka et al. and Ishida et al. teaches the image forming system of claim 8 and Tanaka further teaches a post-processing device disposed downstream of the charge neutralizer (see paragraph 230).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on October 1, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the combination of Tanaka and Ishida does not teach the claimed requirements of claim 1 because Tanaka does not teach arranging a neutralizer system on opposite sides of the substrate, while Ishida, which does teach a neutralizer on either side, does not teach powered neutralizers. However, taken together, the references teach a powered neutralizer and a neutralizer provided each side of the substrate.
Applicant argues that the combination could not be reasonable combined to suggest a second power source to output a second neutralizing bias to remove charge from another face of the recording medium of claim 1 and that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have modified the teachings to arrive at the claimed features. Applicant argues that the one of ordinary skill in the art would have to perform the five steps outlined in page 7 of the Remarks and that this selective combination would constitute hindsight.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
One of ordinary skill in the art would identify the problem of single sided neutralization since Tanaka demonstrates charge on both surfaces of the substrate. Ishida is a printing apparatus which removes charge from both surface of the substrate. Beginning from Tanaka as the primary reference, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide essentially a duplicate system of Tanaka on both surfaces of the substrate. This is a solution which can be as reasonably likely to be successful as the specific passive system of Ishida. Provision of a powered system to have a polarity opposite that of the first power source would within knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art, since the charge to be removed from the opposite side of the substrate is an opposite charge from the primary Tanaka reference. Providing a system opposite electrical polarity is well within the ability of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DAVID H BANH whose telephone number is (571)270-3851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12-8PM.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571)272-2149. 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.
/DAVID H BANH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853