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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed on April 30 2026. Claims 1, 3-6, 10-13 have been amended. Claims 1-13 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
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 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(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ishidate (JP 2013222142) in view of Koga et al (US 7451973).
Re 1 and 13, Ishidate discloses an image forming apparatus (Fig 1) comprising: an image forming portion (10) configured to form an image on a sheet (14); and an apparatus (1) comprising: a storage (35) on which an item is placed (par 23); an electrical component (31); a storage frame (30) in which the storage and the electrical component are stored (par 24-25), the storage frame (30) including an opening portion (83); a power supply portion (60) provided outside the storage frame and configured to supply power to the electrical component (Fig 5, par 30); a cable (82) configured to connect the electrical component and the power supply portion via the opening portion (83) provided in the storage frame (par 29); and a seal member (80) provided between the opening portion and the cable (Fig 5, par 31).
Ishidate fails to disclose the item is a sheet, the apparatus is a sheet stacking apparatus, and a sheet feeding portion configured to feed the sheet placed on the storage.
However, Koga teaches An image forming apparatus (900) comprising: an image forming portion (901) configured to form an image on a sheet (S); and a sheet stacking apparatus (300/400/1001) on which the sheet from the image forming portion is stacked (col 3 ln 50- col 4 ln 36), the sheet stacking apparatus including: a storage (320/56’) on which the sheet is placed (col 5 ln 22-col 6 ln 4); a sheet feeding portion (11) configured to feed the sheet placed on the storage (col 4 ln 40-67); an electrical component (305, 306, 309)(col 6 ln 5-22); a storage frame (301) in which the storage (320/56’) and the electrical component are stored (col 6 ln 40-67); a power supply portion (330, 430) provided outside the storage frame and configured to supply power to the electrical component (Fig 4); a cable configured to connect the electrical component and the power supply portion via an opening portion provided in the storage frame (Fig 8). The storage (320) is hermetically closed by cover (322) of the storage frame (301).
Given the teachings of Koga, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the apparatus of Ishidate with a sheet stacking apparatus.
Doing so would allow various sized image forming apparatuses to have one or more electrical components hermetically closed within the housing where an electrical component aids in feeding sheets from a detachably attached sheet stacking tray for sheets difficult to feed and separate due to coating. Many components of the image forming apparatus are protected and sealed but eliminate the stress on the electrical cable without reducing sealing performance around any electrical component.
RE 2, Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the storage frame stores the sheet feeding portion (Koga Fig 8 & 15).
Re 3, Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the seal member (80) is an elastic member (par 28), the opening portion (83) is defined by one portion and another portion of the storage frame (par 29), and the seal member comprises a first seal member (80a) configured to seal the opening portion between the one portion of the storage frame and the cable and a second seal member (80a) configured to seal the opening portion between the other portion of the storage frame and the cable (par 30, Fig 5b).
RE 4 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the seal member (80) is an elastic member (par 28), surrounds an outer periphery of the cable (Fig 5b), and seals the opening portion between the cable and the storage frame (par 30-31).
RE 5 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the seal member (80) is an elastic member (par 28), has a cylindrical shape fitted onto an outer periphery of the cable (Fig 5b), and seals the opening portion between the cable and the storage frame (par 30-31).
Re 6 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, where an outer diameter D1 of the cable, an inner diameter D2 of the opening portion, and an inner diameter D3 of the seal member which abuts against the cable satisfy a relationship of D1-D3>D2-D1 (par 30-31).
Re 7, Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the electrical component is a fan configured to blow air to the sheet placed on the storage (Koga Fig 4 & 12, Koga col 6 ln 5-39).
RE 8, Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the electrical component is a sensor configured to detect the sheet (Koga col 6 ln 5-39, col 7 ln 12-20, Fig 7).
Re 9 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the seal member is a sponge (par 39).
RE 10 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the storage frame (30) includes a sealing cover (49) removably attached to the storage frame (30), and the opening portion is provided in the sealing cover (Fig 7).
Re 11 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the storage frame (30) includes a sealing cover (49) removably attached to the storage frame (30), and a sealing lid (85) attached to the sealing cover (49), and wherein the opening portion is defined by a first halved opening portion provided in the sealing cover and a second halved opening portion provided in the sealing lid (Fig 8-9, par 38-39).
Re 12 Ishidate as modified by Koga teaches, wherein the seal member (80) has a first seal member having a first halved cylindrical portion ( above 80a) and a second seal member having a second halved cylindrical portion ( below 80a) (Fig 5b, par 30-31).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the optical box 30 of Ishidate would not have any viable reason to store sheets and would interfere with the operations of the optical components, and it would not have been obvious for Koga to incorporate the sealing configuration taught by Ishidate because the sealing member 80 (Ishidate) is provided to ensure high level of dust resistance required in the light scanning apparatus, and Koga explicitly discloses blowing air to the sheet stack defeating the purpose of providing a seal for dust protection for the light scanning apparatus of Koga.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the box (30) of Ishidate is a storage frame in which a storage (35, Fig 3-4) and an electrical component (31) are stored (Fig 7). The box (30) includes an opening portion (83) for the cable (82) to connect the electrical component inside the box to a power supply (60) outside the box, and a sealing member (80) sealing the cable (82) in the opening portion (83). The sheet feeding unit (300) of Koga includes case (301) holding a sheet tray (56, 56’) on which sheets are loaded, and a fan (305). The case (301) includes a cable to connect the fan to a power supply (330) external to the unit (Fig 8), and air is blown within the case forming a hermetically closed sheet loading space (320) covered by a lid (322) to eliminate sheets from adhering together when being fed to the image forming apparatus but does not explicitly show a sealing member for the cable that allows case to be hermitically closed. Ishidate discloses a structure within an image forming apparatus with a sealing member for the power cable of the structure. Koga teaches a sealed structure, specifically a sheet stacking apparatus with a power cable.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christle I. Marshall whose telephone number is (571) 270-3086. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday 7:30AM - 4:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Paik can be reached on (571) 272-2404. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Christle I Marshall/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights