Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
2. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: (1) “first protruding portion” in claims 1-7; (2) “engaging part” in claim 2; (3) “engaged part” in claim 2; (4) “second protruding portion” in claims 3 and 6; and (5) “third protruding portion” in claim 3-4. The terms “image forming unit”, “tray”, “feed unit”, and “extension tray” are known terms of art. As such, these terms are NOT being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
3. Claims 4 and 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first stacking surface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the first stacking surface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
4. Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0161897 (Matsumoto) (hereinafter “Matsumoto”).
PNG
media_image1.png
559
575
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Figs. 1-12 show an image forming apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
an image formation unit (10) configured to form an image on a sheet;
a tray (including 301 and 302) disposed on a side surface of an apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) of the image forming apparatus (Fig. 1) including the image formation unit (10) and configured to stack the sheet thereon, the tray (including 301 and 302) being turnable between a closed position (Fig. 2(a)) in which the tray (including 301 and 302) faces the side surface of the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) and an opened position (Fig. 2(b)) in which the tray (including 301 and 302) is opened from the apparatus main body (201) to a position where the tray (including 301 and 302) stacks the sheet thereon;
a feed unit (including 304-306) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the tray (including 301 and 302) toward the image formation unit (10); and
an extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 3 above) configured to stack the sheet thereon, the extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 3 above) being movable between an extension position (Fig. 4) in which the extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 3 above) is extended from the tray (including 301 and 302) toward an upstream side in a sheet feeding direction and a stored position (Fig. 2(a)) in which the extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 3 above) is stored in the tray (including 301 and 302),
wherein the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) has a first protruding portion (201c) protruding from the side surface of the apparatus main body (201) toward the tray (including 301 and 302), and
wherein when the tray (including 301 and 302) is in the closed position (Fig. 2(a)) and the extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 4 above) is in the stored position (Fig. 2(a)), the first protruding portion (201c) presses an outer wall portion of the tray (including 301 and 302) and the extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 3 above) toward the opened position (Fig. 2(b)).
Regarding claim 2, Figs. 1-12 show that the tray (including 301 and 302) includes an engaging part (301g or 301h) that engages with the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) when the tray (including 301 and 302) is in the closed position (Fig. 2(a)),
wherein the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) includes an engaged part (part of element 1 where elements 301g and 301h engage) that is engaged with the engaging part (301g or 301h), and wherein when the engaging part (301g or 301h) engages with the engaged part (part of element 1 where elements 301g and 301h engage), the first protruding portion (201c) presses the outer wall portion of the tray (including 301 and 302) and the extension tray (“Extension tray” in annotated Fig. 3 above) toward the opened position (Fig. 2(b)).
Regarding claim 5, Figs. 1-12 show an image forming apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
an image formation unit (10) configured to form an image on a sheet;
a tray (including 301 and 302) disposed on a side surface of an apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) of the image forming apparatus (Fig. 1) including the image formation unit (10) and configured to stack the sheet thereon, the tray (including 301 and 302) being turnable between a closed position (Fig. 2(a)) in which the tray (including 301 and 302) faces the side surface of the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) and an opened position (Fig. 2(b)) in which the tray (including 301 and 302) is opened from the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) to a position where the sheet is stacked; and
a feed unit (including 304-306) configured to feed the sheet stacked on the tray (including 301 and 302) toward the image formation unit (10),
wherein the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) has a first protruding portion (201c) protruding from a side surface of the apparatus main body (including 1 and 201 in Figs. 2 and 12) toward the tray (including 301 and 302), and
wherein when the tray (including 301 and 302) is in the closed position (Fig. 2(a)), the first protruding portion (201c) presses an outer wall portion of the tray (including 301 and 302) toward the opened position (Fig. 2(b)).
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.
5. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,848,685 (Katsuyama) (hereinafter “Katsuyama”). With regard to claim 7, Figs. 1-12 of Matsumoto show a first stacking surface (302) of the tray (including 301 and 302) and the first protruding portion (201c), but Matsumoto does not show that the first stacking surface has a hole, and does not show that the first protruding portion passes through the hole, as claimed.
Katsuyama shows that it is well-known in the art to provide an image forming apparatus (printer), in which a first stacking surface (23a) of a tray (23) has a hole (42) through which a first protruding portion (including unnumbered protrusion next to notch 30 and element 44) passes, and when the tray (23) is in a closed position (Fig. 6A), the first protruding portion (including unnumbered protrusion next to notch 30 and element 44) is passed through the hole (42) presses the outer wall portion of the tray (23). In particular, at least the unnumbered protrusion next to notch 30 presses an outer wall portion of tray 23 and at least element 44 passes through hole 42. Because both Katsuyama and Matsumoto teach protruding portion arrangements for spacing trays away from apparatus main bodies, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the protruding portion arrangement with the hole and the first protruding portion in Katsuyama for the protruding portion arrangement of Matsumoto to achieve the predictable result of spacing the tray away from the apparatus main body.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 3 and 6 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. Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS A MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 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, Mike McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/THOMAS A MORRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653