CTNF 18/925,206 CTNF 83421 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been received. Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 24 October 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statement has been considered by the Examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3-7, & 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIZUTA et al. (US 2020/0307198 A1) in view of KASHIMURA (US 2023/0127392 A1) . As related to independent claims 1 & 7, MIZUTA et al. teaches a head unit [claim 1] or liquid ejection apparatus [claim 7] comprising: a first ejection unit which includes a first piezoelectric element driven by a first drive signal [i.e. drive pulse], and is configured to eject a liquid due to drive of the first piezoelectric element (MIZUTA et al. – Page 3, Paragraphs 54-57 and Page 5, Paragraph 77); a flexible wiring board electrically coupled to the first ejection unit (MIZUTA et al. – Page 6, Paragraph 90); and a drive signal output circuit to which a first DC voltage signal having a first voltage value, a second DC voltage signal having a second voltage value, and an ejection control signal are input (MIZUTA et al. – Page 3, Paragraphs 54-57 and Figure 31, shown below), and which is configured to output the first drive signal (MIZUTA et al. – Page 3, Paragraphs 54-57 and Figure 31, Reference #620g, shown below), wherein the drive signal output circuit is provided to the flexible wiring board, and is configured to output the first drive signal with the first DC voltage signal selected or deselected and with the second DC voltage signal selected or deselected based on the ejection control signal (MIZUTA et al. – Figure 31, Reference #1100.220a & #1100.220b, shown below). PNG media_image1.png 440 642 media_image1.png Greyscale Continuing with claims 1 & 7, MIZUTA et al. is limited in the teaching of the flexible wiring board and the voltage values. However, KASHIMURA teaches a head unitor liquid ejection apparatus with a first ejection unit, a flexible wiring board, and a drive signal output circuit (KASHIMURA – Page 1, Paragraph 6; Page 2, Paragraph 43; Page 11, Paragraph 139; and Figure 2, shown below), and specifically teaches a first and second voltage value and ejection control signal input to a drive signal output circuit (KASHIMURA – Page 4, Paragraphs 58-59 and Figures 3 & 4, Reference #COMA, COMB, COMC, shown below). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify the voltage values and flexible wiring board of MIZUTA et al. with those of KASHIMURA in an effort to provide a liquid discharge apparatus with an improved waveform accuracy provide to the piezoelectric element. PNG media_image2.png 462 658 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 336 288 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 446 620 media_image4.png Greyscale As related to dependent claims 3 & 9 the combination of MIZUTA et al. and KASHIMURA remains as applied above and continues to teach a second ejection unit which includes a second piezoelectric element driven by a second drive signal, and is configured to eject the liquid due to drive of the second piezoelectric element (MIZUTA et al. – Figure 31, shown above and KASHIMURA – Figure 4, Reference #60, shown above), wherein the drive signal output circuit is configured to output the second drive signal with the first DC voltage signal selected or deselected and with the second DC voltage signal selected or deselected based on the ejection control signal (MIZUTA et al. – Page 15, Paragraphs 174-175 and Figure 31, Reference #28 & #281a/b, shown above), and a propagation distance at which the first drive signal is propagated from the drive signal output circuit to the first ejection unit and a propagation distance at which the second drive signal is propagated from the drive signal output circuit to the second ejection unit are substantially equal to each other (MIZUTA et al. – Figure 31, shown above and KASHIMURA – Figure 4, shown above). As related to dependent claims 4 & 10 the combination of MIZUTA et al. and KASHIMURA remains as applied above and continues to teach the drive signal output circuit is configured to output the first drive signal including an ejection waveform which drives the first piezoelectric element so that the liquid is ejected from the first ejection unit (KASHIMURA – Page 4, Paragraph 64 – Page 5, Paragraph 73). As related to dependent claims 5 & 11 the combination of MIZUTA et al. and KASHIMURA remains as applied above and continues to teach the drive signal output circuit is configured to output the first drive signal including a microvibration waveform which drives the first piezoelectric element so that the liquid is not ejected from the first ejection unit (MIZUTA et al. – Page 3, Paragraphs 56-57 and KASHIMURA – Page 5, Paragraph 71; Page 6, Paragraph 76; Page 7, Paragraph 93 and Figure 7, shown below). PNG media_image5.png 538 436 media_image5.png Greyscale As related to dependent claims 6 & 12 the combination of MIZUTA et al. and KASHIMURA remains as applied above and continues to teach the drive signal output circuit is configured to output the first drive signal including an inspection waveform [i.e. no liquid is discharged] for inspecting a state of the first ejection unit (MIZUTA et al. – Page 3, Paragraphs 56-57 and KASHIMURA – Page 5, Paragraph 71; Page 6, Paragraph 76; Page 7, Paragraph 93 and Figure 7, shown above) . Allowable Subject Matter 07-43 Claims 2 & 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim [claim 1 or 7, respectively ] , but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim [claim 1 or 7] and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As related to dependent claims 2 & 8, the prior art of record does not teach the drive signal output circuit includes a first selection circuit configured to select or deselect the first DC voltage signal, a second selection circuit configured to select or deselect the second DC voltage signal and a waveform information storage circuit as claimed . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sato (US 2002/0109752 A1) teaches a printer which uses driving voltages with different time widths. Hayashi (US 2004/0090489 A1) teaches a printer which uses multiple programs for controlling the ejector/nozzle groups. Ochiai et al. (US 2006/0119632 A1) teaches a printing apparatus with a driving circuit that distributes a plurality of data. MIYAZAWA et al. (US 2019/0283421 A1) teaches a liquid ejecting apparatus with a drive signal generation unit. YAMADA et al. (US 2019/0291419 A1) teaches a liquid ejection apparatus which produces multiple output voltages and multiple electrodes to supply the drive signals. FUJISAWA et al. (US 2022/0097362 A1) teaches a liquid discharging apparatus with a control unit and multiple switch circuits which switch between output and non-output. SATO et al. (US 2023/0010747 A1) teaches a liquid discharging apparatus with a control unit and multiple driving elements and driving the piezoelectric element with an inspection pulse. ARAKANE (US 2023/0311485 A1) teaches a liquid ejection apparatus with a single drive signal output . Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular Figures & Reference Numbers, Columns, Paragraphs and Line Numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JOHN P ZIMMERMANN whose telephone number is (571)270-3049. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1730 EST. 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, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached at (571) 272-5960. 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. /John P Zimmermann/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/925,206 Page 2 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/925,206 Page 3 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/925,206 Page 4 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/925,206 Page 5 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/925,206 Page 6 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/925,206 Page 7 Art Unit: 2853
Prosecution Insights