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 .
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura et al (US 9,046,691 B2) in view of Imai et al (US 2007/0058255 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Uemura discloses an optical scanning device (Figs 8 and 9) comprising:
a light source (11m, 11c, 11y, 11k) that emits a light beam (Bm, Bc, By, Bk);
a deflector (17) having a deflection surface that deflects the light beam (surfaces of 17); and
a first lens (21) and a second lens (22) that are arranged on an optical path of the light beam deflected by the deflector, the first and second lenses extending in a main scanning direction and a sub-scanning direction of the light beam, the light beam passing through the first and second lenses in this order (see Fig. 8),
wherein
the light source is arranged at a position where the light beam strikes the deflection surface obliquely in the sub-scanning direction (see Fig. 9 and column 12 “a pair of optical beams By and Bm and a pair of optical beams Bc and Bk are incident on their respective different surfaces of the polygon mirror. Here, optical beams By and Bm incident on the same reflective surface are obliquely incident at the same angle … with respect to horizontal plane F1 … as shown in FIG. 9, and the same applies to optical beams Bc and Bk incident on the same reflective surface as each other”).
Although the prior art is silent on the shapes of entrance and exit surfaces of the first and second lenses, for the first (21) and second lenses (22), shapes of entrance and exit surfaces thereof with respect to the light beam are defined by a main scanning direction shape formula and a sub-scanning direction shape formula. Otherwise, the beams would not correctly scanned.
However, the prior art does not disclose the main scanning direction shape formula and a sub-scanning direction shape formula that include different coefficients for one side and another side with respect to a middle in the main scanning direction,
the sub-scanning direction shape formula includes, as a variable, a sub-scanning direction curvature radius defined by a sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula, and the sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula is given by a polynomial with a coordinate in the main scanning direction as a variable, and includes a first order term of the variable.
Imai discloses a main scanning direction shape formula and a sub-scanning direction shape formula that include different coefficients for one side and another side with respect to a middle in the main scanning direction (main scanning direction: para 100 “higher coefficients are A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6…”; sub-scanning direction: para 107 “higher coefficients are A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6”),
the sub-scanning direction shape formula includes, as a variable, a sub-scanning direction curvature radius defined by a sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula, and the sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula is given by a polynomial with a coordinate in the main scanning direction as a variable, and includes a first order term of the variable (para 100 “polynomial”, para 107 “polynomial”, see paras 97-107 formulas 1, 2, 3; see shape of first surface of scanning lens 1: paras 108-124; shape of second surface of scanning lens 1: paras 125-130; shape of first surface of scanning lens 2: paras 131-145; shape of second surface of scanning lens 2: paras 146-157).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the shapes of entrance and exit surfaces of the first and second lenses as taught by Imai for the purpose of obtaining precise aberration correction since standard or simple cylindrical surfaces cannot uniformly focus light across a wide scanning angle. Defining the curvature radius as a higher order polynomial along the lens coordinate allow independent control of distortion, field curvature and astigmatism from the center of the lens all the wat to the scanning margins.
Regarding claim 2, Uemura in view of Imai discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the first order term of the sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula has equal coefficients in the one and the other sides with respect to the middle in the main scanning direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to have the first order term of the sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula has equal coefficients in the one and the other sides with respect to the middle in the main scanning direction for the purpose of obtaining symmetrical spot performance and focal plane, in a standard optical layout where the scan path is centered on the optical axis, a symmetric lens shape ensures that the focal length, wavefront aberration, spot size and spot distortion behave identically on the left and right sides of the scan line.
Regarding claim 3, Uemura in view of Imai discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein in the sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula, orders of all terms other than the first order term are even numbers.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to have wherein in the sub-scanning direction curvature radius definition formula, orders of all terms other than the first order term are even numbers for the purpose of restricting the sub-scanning curvature radius profile to purely symmetric functions along the main scanning coordinate. This design offers distinct functional advantages for optical scanning device to have symmetrical aberration control across the field and elimination of asymmetric optical distortion.
Regarding claim 4, the image forming apparatus comprising:
the optical scanning device according to claim 1, and
an image forming portion having an image carrying member of which an outer circumferential surface is irradiated with the light beam to form an electrostatic latent image (Imai, para 275 “the charging unit 13 is a charging member included in a charging device for uniformly charging the surface of the photoconductor 12. An optical scanning device 20 emits a light beam onto the surface of the photoconductor 12 between the charging unit 13 and the developing unit 14, thereby forming an electrostatic latent image on the photoconductor 12”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNCHA P CHERRY whose telephone number is (571)272-2310. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 7am to 3:30pm.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
9/11/2026
/EUNCHA P CHERRY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights