Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/15/2026 has been entered.
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.
3. Claims 3 and 5 are 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.
Claim 3 ultimately depends from claim 1. Claim 1 recites “discharging direction”. After this, claim 3 recites “a sheet discharge direction” and “the sheet discharge direction”. It is unclear if the previously recited “discharge direction” in claim 1 is the same or different from the recited “sheet discharge direction” in claim 3. Further clarification is needed to understand claim 3.
Claim 5 ultimately depends from claim 1. Claim 1 recites “discharging direction”. After this, claim 5 recites “a sheet discharge direction”. It is unclear if the previously recited “discharge direction” in claim 1 is the same or different from the recited “sheet discharge direction” in claim 5. Further clarification is needed to understand claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
4. Claims 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Publication No. 2000-255875 (hereinafter “JP’875”) (a reference of record).
PNG
media_image1.png
522
687
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Figs. 1-5 show a sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 1) on which a sheet discharged by a discharge portion (including 34) in a discharging direction (“Discharging direction” in annotated Fig. 5) is stacked, the sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
a wire (45) including:
a stacking portion (“Stacking Portion” in annotated Fig. 5) on which the sheet discharged by the discharge portion (including 34) is stacked;
a first support portion (“First support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) arranged to contact a first supported portion (“First supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) of the wire (45) and configured to support the first supported portion (“First supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5); and
a second support portion (“Second support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) disposed at a different position in the discharging direction (“Discharging direction” in annotated Fig.5) from the first support portion (“First support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in a plan view (top view), arranged to contact a second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) of the wire (45), and configured to support the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5),
wherein at least a part of the stacking portion (“Stacking portion” in annotated Fig. 5) is located between the first supported portion (“First supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) and the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in the discharging direction (“Discharging direction” in annotated Fig. 5) in the plan view (top view). Figure 5 appears to show the wire (45) suspended. In this scenario, the first and second supported portions are supported from falling by the first and second support portions, respectively.
Regarding claim 2, Figs. 1-5 show that the wire (45) includes a first bent portion (“First bent portion” in annotated Fig. 5) that is bent downward, and wherein the first bent portion (“First bent portion” in annotated Fig. 5) is located between the first support portion (“First support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) and the second support portion (“Second support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in the horizontal direction.
Regarding claim 3, Figs. 1-5 show that the stacking portion (“Stacking portion” in annotated Fig. 5) of the wire (45) is located upstream of the first bent portion (“First bent portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in a sheet discharge direction,
wherein the second support portion (“Second support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) is located downstream of the first bent portion (“First bent portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in the sheet discharge direction, and
wherein the wire (45) includes an inclined portion (“Inclined portion” in annotated Fig. 5) that is inclined downward toward a downstream side in the sheet discharge direction between the first bent portion (“First bent portion” in annotated Fig. 5) and the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, Figs. 1-5 show that the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) of the wire (45) and the second support portion (“Second support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) are in line contact with each other.
Regarding claim 5, Figs. 1-5 show that the wire (45) includes a pair of portions extending vertically (“Portion extending vertically” in annotated Fig. 5) and located at an interval in a sheet width direction perpendicular to a sheet discharge direction, wherein the wire (45) further includes a pair of second bent portions (“Second bent portions” in annotated Fig. 5) located below the pair of portions (“Portion extending vertically” in annotated Fig. 5), respectively, and wherein the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in line contact with the second support portion (“Second support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) corresponds to a portion of the wire (45) located between the pair of second bent portions (“Second bent portions” in annotated Fig. 5) and extending in the sheet width direction to connect the pair of portions (“Portion extending vertically” in annotated Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Figs. 1-5 show an image forming apparatus comprising:
an image forming portion (including 1-3 and 5-6) configured to form an image on a sheet; and
a sheet stacking apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the sheet having the image formed thereon by the image forming portion (including 1-3 and 5-6) is stacked on the sheet stacking apparatus.
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.
5. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’875 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 3,474,912 (Pekera et al.) (hereinafter “Pekera”). With regard to claims 6 and 7, JP’875 teaches all of the limitations of these claims, except for a retaining member or a cover, as claimed.
With regard to claim 6, Pekera shows that it is well-known in the art to provide a sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 1) with a retaining member (66) configured to prevent a supported portion (62) from being detached from a support portion (frame) and moving upward, for the purpose of attaching the supported portion (62) to the support portion (frame). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the sheet stacking apparatus of JP’875 with a retaining member, for the purpose of attaching the second supported portion of JP’875 to the second support portion of JP’875, as shown in Pekera.
With regard to claim 7, Pekera shows that it is well-known in the art to provide the sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 1) with a cover (58) including an opening (60), wherein a wire (12) is inserted into the opening (60) of the cover (58), and the support portion (frame) is located below the opening (60) of the cover (58), for the purpose of removably attaching the wire to the support portion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 5) of JP’875 with a cover having an opening, for the purpose of removably attaching the wire of JP’875 to the second support portion of JP’875, as taught by Pekera.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant's arguments filed 5/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues
However, as amended above, claim 1 clearly defines the positional relationship between the two support portions in the discharging direction in a plan view, as well as the arrangement relationship that "at least a part of the stacking portion is located between the first supported portion and the second supported portion in the discharging direction in the plan view."
In other words, the primary objective of the JP '875 is to "curve the sheets using rib-shaped portions to ensure stacking capacity," and at the very least, JP '875 does not disclose "a second support portion disposed at a different position in the discharging direction from the first support portion in a plan view, arranged to contact a second supported portion of the wire, and configured to support the second supported portion, wherein at least a part of the stacking portion is located between the first supported portion and the second supported portion in the discharging direction in the plan view."
Therefore, claimed invention, as amended above, is different from the configuration disclosed in JP '875.
The examiner disagrees with this argument. JP’875 teaches a second support portion (“Second support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) disposed at a different position in the discharging direction from a first support portion (“First support portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in a plan view, arranged to contact a second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) of a wire (45), and configured to support the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5),
wherein at least a part of a stacking portion (“Stacking portion” in annotated Fig. 5) is located between the first supported portion (“First supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) and the second supported portion (“Second supported portion” in annotated Fig. 5) in the discharging direction in the plan view (top view).
The rejections of dependent claims 2-8 are also outlined above.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. With regard to claim 1, U.S. Patent No. 5,240,243 (Gompertz et al.) shows a sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 2) on which a sheet discharged by a discharge portion (18) in a discharging direction is stacked, the sheet stacking apparatus (Fig. 2) comprising: a wire (Fig. 3) including: a stacking portion (36) on which the sheet discharged by the discharge portion (18) is stacked; a first support portion (23) arranged to contact a first supported portion (48) of the wire and configured to support the first supported portion (48); and a second support portion (62) disposed at a different position in the discharging direction from the first support portion (23) in a plan view, arranged to contact a second supported portion (84) of the wire, and configured to support the second supported portion (84), wherein at least a part of the stacking portion (36) is located between the first supported portion (48) and the second supported portion (84) in the discharging direction in the plan view. Gompertz reads on at least claim 1.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS A MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Mike McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/THOMAS A MORRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights