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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, (Fig. 3) and subspecies IA (Fig. 17), claims 1-13 in the reply filed on July 2, 2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities: It is noted that Figure 14 is labeled “PUMPING CORRECTION” at the top. However, it appears that this term should be --BUMPING CORRECTION-- according to the specification (see, for example, the brief description of Figure 14 on page 4 of the specification and paragraphs [0144]-[0145]). Similarly, it is noted the Figure 16 is labeled “BUMPING CORRECTION INCLUDING ROTATIONAL DIRECTION” at the top. However, it appears that this term should be --BUMPING CORRECTION INCLUDING ROTATIONAL DIRECTION” according to the specification (see, for example, the brief description of Figure 16 on page 4 of the specification and paragraphs [0151] and [0158]-[0160])
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “130” has been used to designate both the light projected by the distance sensor 31 in Figure 25 as described in paragraph [0184] and the pressing mechanism in Figure 33 as described in paragraph [0193].
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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph {0106], it is suggested that term “S104” (both occurrences) be deleted and replaced with the term --SA104-- since that is how the reference numeral has been illustrated in Figure 8B. Additionally, in paragraph [0254], it is suggested that term “SP99” be deleted and replaced with --SP9-- since that is how the reference character is illustrated in Figure 42. Additionally, in paragraph [0266], it is suggested that the term “FIG. 49” be deleted and replaced with --FIG. 47-- since Figure 47 is a flowchart illustrating the process described in paragraph [0266]
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With respect to claim 1, it is noted that line 1 of claim 1 recites “an object conveyed by a conveyor” and then lines 4-5 recite “a drawing target object” and it is unclear if these terms are intended to be referring to the same object or different objects. From the context of the claim language, it appears these terms are intended to be referring to the same object. However, consistent terminology should be used throughout the claims. Therefore, it is suggested that the claim language be amended as necessary to use the same terminology throughout. One possible solution to correct this issue is to amend line 1 to recite “a drawing target object” and then amend line 4 to recite --the drawing target object--.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokunaga et al. (US 2017/0225494 A1) in view of Murayama (US 2022/0410567 A1)
With respect to claim 1, Tokunaga et al. teaches an ink jet printer 11 (Fig. 1) that ejects ink to draw information on an object P conveyed by a conveyor 30, the ink jet printer 11 comprising:
a nozzle N, 161 (paragraph [0083]-[0085], Fig. 6) configured to eject the ink supplied from an ink tank toward a drawing target object P;
a storage unit 60, 62, 63, 64, 71 that stores drawing data PD (Fig. 12, paragraphs [0075], [0113]) specifying an ejection timing of the nozzle N, 161 at each of a plurality of offset positions in a conveyance direction Y, the ejection timing corresponding to drawing information;
a distance sensor 39 that measures a distance PG to the drawing target object P in an ejection direction of the nozzle N, 161 (paragraphs [0077]-[0078]); and
a drawing control unit 50, 55, 80 that controls ink ejection from the nozzle based on the drawing data PD and a current relative position from the nozzle to each of the plurality of offset positions of the drawing data (paragraph [0119]-[0123],
wherein the drawing control unit controls the ink ejection based on a determination result as to whether the distance to the drawing target object in the ejection direction of the nozzle measured by the distance sensor satisfies a predetermined criterion (see, for example, paragraphs [0153]-[0167] which describe controlling (i.e., increasing, decreasing, or stopping) the discharge timing of the head based on whether the measured gap between the printhead and the paper is larger or smaller than a threshold gap). Particular attention is invited to Figures 1-9, 12-13, 16, and 20-21.
Tokunaga et al. do not specifically teach the inkjet printer includes an ink tank that stores the ink. However, the provision of an ink tank for storing ink for an inkjet printer is well known in the art, as exemplified by the ink tank for storing ink for the inkjet printer apparatus of Murayama as described in paragraphs [0018]-[0019]. In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the inkjet printer of Tokunaga et al. with an ink tank as taught by Murayama to provide a well known device for storing ink to be supplied to an inkjet printhead.
With respect to claim 2, Tokunaga et al. teaches wherein a timing signal PTS, which indicates that a reference position of the drawing target object P is at a predetermined position, is generated based on a change in the distance PG to the drawing target object P in the ejection direction of the nozzle measured by the distance sensor 39, and the drawing control unit determines the current relative position from the nozzle to each of the plurality of offset positions of the drawing data using the timing signal as a reference, and controls ink ejection from a plurality of ejection ports 161 formed in the nozzle N based on the current relative position and the drawing data. See, in particular, Figure 16 and paragraphs [0115]-[0118] and [0150]-[0167].
With respect to claim 3, Tokunaga et al. teaches the ink jet printer being configured to be capable of setting information identifying a positional relationship between the distance sensor 39 and the nozzle 161, wherein the distance sensor 39 measures the distance PG to the drawing target object P in the ejection direction of the nozzle by reflecting the information identifying the positional relationship. See, in particular, Figures 6-9 and paragraphs [0088]-[0090].
With respect to claim 4, Tokunaga et al. teaches a housing 16 in which the nozzle is provided, wherein the distance sensor 39 is fixed to the housing in such a manner that a positional relationship with the nozzle is a predetermined positional relationship, as shown in Figure 3 and described in paragraph [0079].
With respect to claim 5, Tokunaga et al. teaches wherein the nozzle N has a plurality of ejection ports 161 formed along a first direction W, and the distance sensor 39 is arranged at a position offset from the nozzle along the conveyance direction Y (see Figs. 2, 5), and is installed in such a manner that a position in the first direction of a drawing target region to which the nozzle is directed and a position in the first direction of a region where a current offset position is measured by the distance sensor at least partially overlap each other, as shown by Figs. 2-5.
With respect to claim 6, Tokunaga et al. teaches an optical movement measurement sensor 38 that receives light from the drawing target object P and generates a measurement value related to movement of the drawing target object in the conveyance direction Y based on the received light, wherein the drawing control unit determines a current offset position with respect to a reference position of the drawing target object P based on the measurement value generated by the optical movement measurement sensor (see paragraphs [0088]-[0097]).
With respect to claim 12, Tokunaga et al. teach the distance sensor 39 is downstream of the optical movement measurement sensor 38 in the conveyance direction Y, as shown in Figure 3.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-11 and 13 are 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:
With respect to claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest an ink jet printer having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, an optical movement measurement sensor that is fixed to the housing in which the nozzle is provided in such a manner that a positional relationship with the nozzle is a predetermined positional relationship.
With respect to claim 8, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest an ink jet printer having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, the nozzle having a plurality of ejection ports formed along a first direction and the optical movement measurement sensor being arranged at a position offset from the nozzle along the conveyance direction and installed in such a manner that a position in the first direction of a drawing target region to which the nozzle is directed and a position in the first direction of a region where the current offset position is measured by the optical movement sensor at least partially overlap each other.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Maruta et al. (JP 2019-034527 A) and Lubinsky et al. (US 6,561,607 B1) each teach an ink jet printing device having similarities to the claimed subject matter that are readily apparent.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESLIE J THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2161. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 8:30-5:00 pm.
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 D Meier can be reached at 571-272-7149. 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.
/Leslie J Thompson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights