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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A and Species 1 in the reply filed on 6/9/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims themselves are not species. This is not found persuasive because the Office Action did not point to the claims themselves as the species; rather, the Office Action indicated which claims correspond to each of the disclosed species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 6:
This claim depends from claim 3, which requires execution of the recovery operation “after the circulation unit is stopped.” However, claim 6 then also requires the control unit to stop the circulation unit “after the recovery operation is started.” These limitations appear to contradict each other in the timing at which the recovery operation is executed. In particular, is the recovery operation executed before or after the circulation unit is stopped?
Regarding claim 7:
This claim requires the control unit to increase the ejection frequency of the preliminary ejection in a case that the preliminary ejection is not completed within a time range in which ejection is possible (“at which the liquid ejection head can eject the liquid”). However, if the liquid ejection head cannot eject the liquid, how is the preliminary ejection executed? Moreover, how is it executed with increased frequency?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 10, and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1/2) as being anticipated by Kasai (US 2021/0387456 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 15:
Kasai discloses a liquid ejection apparatus comprising:
a liquid ejection head (3) including an ejection port (orifice 9) configured to eject a liquid and a pressure chamber (14) communicating with the ejection port (Figs. 3-4);
a circulation unit (inherent to paragraph 26) configured to circulate the liquid in the liquid ejection head so as to pass through the pressure chamber (paragraph 31 & Fig. 3);
a recovery unit (cleaning mechanism 30) configured to perform a recovery operation of the liquid ejection head at a circulation flow velocity slower than a circulation flow velocity of the circulation unit in a case where the liquid ejection head prints an image on a printing medium (circulation is stopped: paragraphs 34, 48); and
a control unit (control mechanism 50) configured to control preliminary ejection to eject the liquid that is not used for the printing from the ejection port in parallel with the recovery operation by the recovery unit (paragraph 34 & Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 2:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the control unit performs the preliminary ejection from the ejection port in which the recovery operation is completed (paragraph 34 & Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 3:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that, after a printing operation on the printing medium is completed, the control unit executes the recovery operation after the circulation unit is stopped (paragraphs 34, 48).
Regarding claim 5:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 3, and also that the control unit completes the recovery operation and the preliminary ejection within a time range in which the circulation flow velocity is equal to or greater than a circulation flow velocity at which the liquid ejection head can eject the liquid (preliminary ejection is performed to completion; therefore, preliminary ejection must be completed within a time during which ejection is possible: paragraph 34 & Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the control unit performs the control for each area formed of a predetermined number of ejection ports (for each recording element substrate 4: paragraph 34 & Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 13:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the liquid ejection head includes a first pressure control chamber (pressure adjustment mechanism 6a) connected with a first channel (liquid supply channel 16) communicating with the ejection port (Fig. 3 & paragraph 29) and a second pressure control chamber (pressure adjustment mechanism 6c) connected with a second channel (liquid collection channel 17) communicating with the ejection port (Fig. 3 & paragraph 29), and
wherein the liquid is circulated to pass through the ejection port according to a pressure difference between the first pressure control chamber and the second pressure control chamber (paragraph 29).
Regarding claim 14:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and also that the recovery unit is a wiper (elastic tube 40a) configured to wipe an ejection port surface in which the ejection port is provided (Fig. 6), and
wherein the recovery operation is an operation to wipe the ejection port surface (paragraph 34 & Fig. 6).
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.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasai (US 2021/0387456 A1) in view of Masaki et al. (US 2022/0063283 A1).
Regarding claims 8-9:
Kasai discloses all the limitations of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose a derivation unit configured to derive the circulation flow velocity.
However, Masaki et al. disclose a liquid ejection apparatus that is able to facilitate reduced circulation pump driving while also restraining degradation of flushing drivers (paragraph 87) by comprising a derivation unit (of controller 30 + storage unit 32) configured to derive the circulation flow velocity (paragraph 84), wherein a control unit determines an amount (“frequency”) of flushing drive based on the circulation flow velocity derived by the derivation unit at a time of executing the flushing drive (paragraph 90 & Fig. 5),
wherein the control unit reduces the amount of flushing drive more as the circulation flow velocity after a circulation unit (circulation pump 26c) is stopped is faster (Fig. 5).
Therefore, at the time of filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kasai’s apparatus such that the frequency of preliminary ejection is controlled according to the circulation flow velocity in the manner taught by Masaki et al.
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shelby L Fidler whose telephone number is (571)272-8455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am - 5pm 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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
SHELBY L. FIDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights