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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyokawa (US 20160347053 A1) in view of Connors et al. (US 20220063294 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kiyokawa teaches an apparatus comprising a storage portion (See element 1 of the modified version of Fig. 2 below); a transport portion (Fig. 3 element 303 and paragraph [0048]); a printing platform (Fig. 7a element 210 and paragraph [0045]); a printing mechanism (Fig. 7a element 202 and paragraph [0043]); and a detection sensor (Fig. 7a element 207); wherein the storage portion is configured to store a substrate in a rolled form (See element 1 of the modified version of Fig. 2 below); the printing platform is configured to hold the substrate transported by the transport portion (paragraphs [0045] and [0048]); the printing mechanism is provided above the printing platform (Fig. 7a), and comprises a drive unit (Fig. 3 element 301 and paragraph [0048]) and a print head arranged at the drive unit (Fig. 7a element 201 and paragraph [0043]); and the drive unit is configured to drive the print head to move in a direction orthogonal to a direction in which the substrate is transported (Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0052] and [0048]); and the detection sensor is provided on the drive unit, and is electrically connected to the drive unit (Fig. 3); the drive unit is also configured to drive the detection sensor to move in the direction orthogonal to the direction in which the substrate is transported (Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0052], [0044] and [0048]); and the detection sensor is configured to detect a height of the substrate (paragraphs [0044] and [0071]).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kiyokawa fails to specifically teach the transport portion is provided adjacent to the storage portion, and is configured to continuously transport the substrate forward from the storage portion; the printing platform is provided adjacent to the transport portion.
Connors et al. teaches a printer with a storage portion (Fig. 1a element 112), a transportation portion (Fig. 1a element 104) and printing platform (Fig. 1a element 120), wherein the transport portion is provided adjacent to the storage portion (Fig. 1a), and is configured to continuously transport the substrate forward from the storage portion (Fig. 1a and paragraph [0014]); the printing platform is provided adjacent to the transport portion (Fig. 1a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the general apparatus of Kiyokawa with the specific roller arrangement of Connors et al. as a simple substitution of a general roller arrangement for a specific one known in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Kiyokawa and Connors et al. teach all the elements of claim 1 as stated above and Kiyokawa teaches wherein the printing mechanism further comprises a mounting base configured to mount the print head; and the detection sensor is provided at the mounting base (See element 2 of the modified version of Fig. 7a. below).
PNG
media_image2.png
338
500
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Kiyokawa and Connors et al. teach all the elements of claim 2 as stated above and Kiyokawa teaches wherein the detection sensor is a non-contact sensor (Fig. 12a).
Regarding claim 5, Kiyokawa and Connors et al. teach all the elements of claim 2 as stated above and Kiyokawa teaches wherein the detection sensor is provided in plurality (Fig. 12a elements 401a and b).
However, Kiyokawa fails to specifically a plurality of detection sensors are arranged at intervals along the direction in which the substrate is transported. More specifically Kiyokawa is silent to the exact orientation of its sensors relative to the direction in which the substrate is transported.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to orient the sensors as claimed as an obvious rearrangement of parts according to MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 6, Kiyokawa and Connors et al. teach all the elements of claim 5 as stated above and Kiyokawa teaches wherein the plurality of detection sensors are provided at a side of the print head along the direction orthogonal to the direction in which the substrate is transported (Fig. 2 element 207).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyokawa and Connors et al. as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Lee (US 20100020122 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Kiyokawa and Connors et al. teach all the elements of claim 3 as stated above and Kiyokawa teaches detection sensor is a photoelectric sensor (paragraph [0054]).
Kiyokawa fails to teach a sensor that senses based on light reflection caused by an ink.
Lee teaches a printer with a photoelectric sensor (Fig. 3 element 651 and paragraph [0070]) based on light reflection caused by an ink (paragraph [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the apparatus of Kiyokawa and Connors et al. with the sensing method of Lee as a simple substitution of one measurement method for another to more accurately know the height of the substrate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 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:
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest all the structure as recited alone or in combination with particularly including the mounting base is provided with an avoidance groove, and the avoidance groove is configured to run through a lower surface of the mounting base; and a surface of the print head where an ink-spray hole is arranged is configured to expose from the avoidance groove without protruding from the lower surface of the mounting base.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest all the structure as recited alone or in combination with particularly including wherein two sides of the printing platform in the direction orthogonal to the direction in which the substrate is transported are each provided with a limiting plate, and the limiting plate is configured to restrict the movement of the substrate along an ink ejection direction of the print head; and the limiting plate comprises a limiting portion, and a gap is provided between the limiting portion and an upper surface of the printing platform to allow the substrate to pass through.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Guo (CN 217197453 U) and Kawazoe (US 6601944 B1) are cited as having similar structure to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL F BOELITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3391. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-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, 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.
/SAMUEL FREDERICK BOELITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/Manish S Shah/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights