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, Sub-species A, Sub-sub-species 1 in the reply filed on 7/14/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-11, 14 and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/14/26.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugimoto et al. (JP2009092900A).
With respect to claim 1, Sugimoto et al. disclose an electrostatic collecting device comprising: a collecting unit (e.g., item 23) facing a surface of an object to be cleaned (e.g., item 1), electrostatically collecting objects to be collected existing on the surface of the object to be cleaned (1), and having a rotating body (e.g. core of cleaning brush 23) and a brush (e.g., bristles of cleaning brush 23) provided on a surface of the rotating body (as shown at least by fig. 1); a charging unit (e.g., roller 24) having an insulating member rubbing against the collecting unit (23) and charging the collecting unit by the insulating member (as shown at least by fig. 1 and/or as discussed at least in paragraphs 9, 13, 59-61, 68 and/or 117); and a charge removing unit (e.g., item 31) contacting a surface of the charging unit (24), electrically grounded to remove charge from the surface of the charging unit (24), and having a conductive sheet (31) contacting the charging unit (as shown at least by fig. 1, and/or as discussed at least in paragraphs 63-84).
With respect to claim 2, Sugimoto et al. further disclose wherein the brush (23) has insulating bristles made of an insulating material (as discussed at least in paragraph 42) and is configured to rub against at least the charging unit (24, as shown at least by fig. 1).
With respect to claim 3, Sugimoto et al. further disclose wherein the charging unit (24) has a rotating body (as shown at least by fig. 1).
With respect to claim 4, Sugimoto et al. further disclose a scraping unit (e.g., item 33) contacting the collecting unit (23), scraping off the collected objects to be collected from the collecting unit (23), and being an elastic blade (as discussed at least in paragraphs 73-81 and/or 117); and a container (e.g., item(s) 18 and/or 6; as discussed at least in paragraph 39) storing the objects to be collected scraped off by the scraping unit (33, as shown at least by fig. 1).
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.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugimoto et al. (JP2009092900A) in view of Nakayama (US 2002/0009314).
With respect to claim 12, Sugimoto et al. disclose an image forming device comprising: a photosensitive drum (e.g., item 1) on which an electrostatic latent image is formed (e.g., item 4); a developing unit (e.g., item 6) configured to develop the electrostatic latent image into a toner image; a transfer unit (e.g., transfer device 15) configured to transfer the toner image to a paper.
With further respect to claim 12, Sugimoto et al. do not disclose transferring a toner image to an intermediate transfer member; and collecting toner as the objects to be collected from the intermediate transfer member as the object to be cleaned.
With further respect to claim 12, Nakayama discloses transferring a toner image to an intermediate transfer member (e.g., item 7); and collecting toner as the objects to be collected from the intermediate transfer member (7) as the object to be cleaned (as shown at least by fig. 1 and/or as discussed at least in paragraph 85).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use and clean an intermediate transfer belt as taught by Nakayama in the image forming apparatus of Sugimoto et al. at least because there would have been a reasonable expectation of success in achieving image formation.
With respect to claim 13, Sugimoto et al. further disclose wherein the charging unit is configured to charge the collecting unit to a polarity opposite to the regular charging polarity of the toner (as discussed at least in paragraph(s) 8-10, 16-39, 43-47, 57-62, 68, 76, and/or 81-83).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH S WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-8457. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, Walter L Lindsay Jr. can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/JOSEPH S WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
JSW
Prosecution Insights