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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katagami et al. (US 20230294421 A1) in view of Klotz et al. (EP 1900523 A2).
Regarding claim 1, Katagami et al. teaches a transport unit configured to transport a medium in a transport direction (Fig. 2 element 12 and paragraphs [0060]); a printing unit configured to discharge a liquid to the medium transported by the transport unit to perform printing (Fig. 1 element 13 and paragraph [0012]); a drying unit configured to dry the medium having a printing surface on which printing is performed by the printing unit (Fig. 1 element 14 and paragraph [0020]); and a control unit (Fig. 1 element 17 and paragraph [0022]), wherein the drying unit includes a contact heating unit (Fig. 2 elements 43 and 45 and paragraphs [0032] and [0042]) and an airflow ejecting unit disposed at a position that is opposed to the contact heating unit (Fig. 2 elements 46 and 44 and paragraph [0050]), the airflow ejecting unit being configured to eject an airflow (paragraph [0050]) from an airflow ejecting port (paragraph [0050]), the contact heating unit includes a contact heating surface configured to come into contact with a back surface that is a surface opposite from the printing surface (paragraphs [0032] and [0042]), the airflow ejecting port is opposed to the contact heating surface (Fig. 2 and paragraph [0050]),
Katagami et al. fails to teach the control unit is configured to perform first control and second control, the first control is control in which the airflow ejecting unit is controlled such that a reaching velocity is a first velocity, the reaching velocity being a velocity when an airflow ejected from the airflow ejecting unit reaches the printing surface of the medium supported by the contact heating surface, the second control is control in which the airflow ejecting unit is controlled such that the reaching velocity is slower than the first velocity, and while the printing apparatus is in operation, the control unit is configured to perform the first control when a stopping period is less than a predetermined period, and perform the second control instead of the first control when the stopping period is equal to or more than the predetermined period, the stopping period being a period in which transport of the medium by the transport unit is at rest.
Klotz et al. teaches a printer wherein the control unit (paragraph [0017] wherein the control device is the system) is configured to perform first control and second control, the first control is control in which the airflow ejecting unit is controlled such that a reaching velocity is a first velocity (paragraph [0021] wherein the first control is the airspeed at regular pressure operation), the reaching velocity being a velocity when an airflow ejected from the airflow ejecting unit reaches the printing surface of the medium supported by the contact heating surface, the second control is control in which the airflow ejecting unit is controlled such that the reaching velocity is slower than the first velocity (paragraph [0021] wherein the second control is the reduced supply air volume flow), and while the printing apparatus is in operation, the control unit is configured to perform the first control when a stopping period is less than a predetermined period, and perform the second control instead of the first control when the stopping period is equal to or more than the predetermined period (paragraph [0020]), the stopping period being a period in which transport of the medium by the transport unit is at rest.
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 Katagami et al. with the control method of Klotz et al. as a combination of 2 elements known in the art to yield a printing apparatus capable of “avoid overheating of the printing machine or dryer device when long interruptions are present. With the method according to the invention, energy can be saved” (paragraph [0034] of Klotz et al.).
Regarding claim 7, Katagami et al. and Klotz et al. teach all the elements of claim 1 as stated above and Klotz teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control an air volume of the airflow ejecting unit to control the reaching velocity (paragraph [0021]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katagami et al. (US 20230294421 A1) and Klotz et al. (EP 1900523 A2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Uda et al. (EP 4056381 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Katagami et al. and Klotz et al. teach all the elements of claim 1 as stated above but they fail to teach a fan configured to generate the airflow; and an air guiding section configured to couple the fan and the airflow ejecting port; and a valve provided at the air guiding section and configured to control a degree of closing or opening, and the control unit is configured to control the degree of closing or opening of the valve to control the reaching velocity.
Uda et al. teaches a printer with an airflow ejecting unit (Fig. 2 element 15) including a fan configured to generate the airflow (Fig. 2 element 45 and paragraph [0034]); and an air guiding section configured to couple the fan (Fig. 2 element 41 and paragraph [0034]) and the airflow ejecting port (Fig. 2 element 51); and a valve provided at the air guiding section and configured to control a degree of closing or opening (Fig. 2 element 65 and paragraph [0042]), and the control unit (Fig. 2 element 25) is configured to control the degree of closing or opening of the valve to control the reaching velocity (paragraph [0042]).
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 Katagami et al. and Klotz et al. with the blower of Uda et al. as a simple substitution of a general blowing apparatus for a specific one known in the art to yield a blowing mechanism capable of controlling the output of air.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 9 and 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 2, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printer with the claimed functionality alone or in combination with particularly including the control unit is configured to determine, according to a material of the back surface, whether to perform the first control or the second control when the stopping period is equal to or more than the predetermined period. Specifically, while it is taught to print on a variety of mediums it is not taught to modify the response of the fans in response to a stoppage due to the medium.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printer with the claimed functionality alone or in combination with particularly including the control unit is configured, as the second control, to control the airflow ejecting unit such that the reaching velocity is a second velocity slower than the first velocity and also control the airflow ejecting unit such that the reaching velocity is a third velocity faster than the second velocity and slower than the first velocity.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printer with the claimed functionality alone or in combination with particularly including the transport unit intermittently transports the medium while printing is performed on the medium by the printing unit, the printing unit discharges the liquid to the medium when transporting is at rest during the intermittent transporting, and does not discharge the liquid to the medium when transporting is performed during the intermittent transporting, and the control unit is configured to control the airflow ejecting unit such that the reaching velocity is slower than the first velocity when the medium is transported during the intermittent transporting.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printer with the claimed functionality alone or in combination with particularly including the airflow ejecting unit includes a distance changing unit configured to change a distance between the contact heating surface and the airflow ejecting port, and the control unit is configured to control the distance changing unit to change the distance, thereby controlling the reaching velocity.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printer with the claimed functionality alone or in combination with particularly including the control unit is configured to select at least one of: causing a temperature of the contact heating surface during the second control to be higher than a temperature during the first control; increasing a temperature of the airflow ejected from the airflow ejecting port; and increasing a period of time in which the medium stays within the drying unit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Toyama et al. (US 20240208245 A1) and Washio et al (US 20240208246 A1) are cited for having a similar structure and functionality 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