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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on December 3, 2024 and May 13, 2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: discharge tray 15a, sub discharge tray 15b.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: element 15 in fig. 1.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2 of the claim recites, “An ink collection tray that, when recovery operation is performed (emphasis added).” The highlighted portion appears to contain a typographical error. A possible correction would read as follows, “An ink collection tray that, when a recovery operation is performed.” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is 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.
Line 10 of the claim recites, “a waste ink discharge portion disposed adjacent to the waste ink catching portion, the ink collection tray having a downward slope from the waste ink catching portion toward the waste ink discharge portion.” The claim fails to provide an orientation for a direction that amounts to a downward direction relative to any of the structural elements of the claim. The claim also fails to recite a gravitational direction or a downward direction. Thus, the shape of the slope is rendered unclear by the language of the claim.
For the purpose of compact examination, the ink catching portion is being interpreted to be closer in proximity to the ink ejection surface than the waste ink discharge portion is to the ink ejection surface.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ogasahara (US 20200016899 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ogasahara teaches an inkjet recording apparatus (fig. 1; inkjet recording apparatus 1; ¶[0026]) comprising
an ink collection tray that, when recovery operation is performed for a recording head that ejects ink onto a recording medium, is disposed opposite the recording head to collect the ink pushed out onto an ink ejection surface of the recording head (figs. 13; waste liquid tray 75A; ¶[0066]-[0069]); and
a cleaning liquid feeding mechanism that feeds onto the ink collection tray a cleaning liquid for flushing off the ink (fig. 3; cleaning liquid ejection nozzle 512; ¶[0051]), wherein
the ink collection tray includes: a waste ink catching portion disposed opposite the ink ejection surface (fig. 13; liquid receiving surface 752; ¶[0071]); and
a waste ink discharge portion disposed adjacent to the waste ink catching portion, the ink collection tray having a downward slope from the waste ink catching portion toward the waste ink discharge portion (fig. 13; discharge portion 751; ¶[0071]), and
the waste ink catching portion has formed therein a plurality of grooves with a V-shaped cross section extending along the downward slope (figs. 12, 13; unmarked v-shaped channels comprising liquid receiving surfaces 752; ¶[0071]).
Regarding claim 2, Ogasahara teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of grooves are formed adjacent to each other, parallel to each other, with ridge portions and valley portions alternating along a tray width direction orthogonal to the downward slope (figs. 12, 13; unmarked v-shaped channels comprising liquid receiving surfaces 752; ¶[0071]).
Regarding claim 5, Ogasahara teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cleaning liquid feeding mechanism feeds the cleaning liquid to a highest part of the waste ink catching portion (fig. 16A-C; liquid droplets D1; ¶[0071], [0074]).
Regarding claim 6, Ogasahara teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recording head has a cleaning liquid feeding portion that feeds the cleaning liquid to the ink ejection surface, and the cleaning liquid feeding portion doubles as the cleaning liquid feeding mechanism, with the highest part of the waste ink catching portion disposed opposite the cleaning liquid feeding portion (See ¶[0071], which teaches an arrangement similar to figs. 17A-C wherein the slope of the liquid receiving surface 752 is opposite to that shown in the images).
Regarding claim 7, Ogasahara teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a maintenance unit that has a wiper movable across the ink ejection surface and that performs the recovery operation for the recording head by wiping off with the wiper the ink pushed out onto the ink ejection surface, and the ink collection tray is mounted in the maintenance unit (figs. 12, 16A-C; liquid droplets D1, wiper blades 742; ¶[0066], [0071], [0074]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogasahara (US 20200016899 A1) in view of Shindo et al. (US 20020075348 A1), hereinafter Shindo.
Ogasahara teaches the inkjet recording apparatus according to claim 2, however Ogasahara fails to teach the plurality of grooves have an inclination angle of 3 to 5 degrees between the ridge portions and the valley portions.
However, Shindo teaches a suction cap for an ink-jet recording apparatus including a sloped liquid guide comprising a pair of v-shaped grooves (figs. 3, 8; tilt angle F, capillary force generating member 50; ¶[0055]-[0056]). Shindo further teaches the slope of the tilt surface (fig. 8; tilt surface 52b) of the v-shape groove is preferably provided at an angle greater than a predetermined amount (¶[0056]) to create smooth ink flow. The teachings of Shindo identify the slope of the v-shaped grooves as a result-effective variable well known in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably settle on an inclination angle recited in the claim through routine experimentation to optimize the flow of ink down the v-shaped grooves to the waste ink discharge portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Shindo into the apparatus of Ogasahara in order to optimize the flow of the ink in the v-shaped grooves of the waste tray.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 3, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the inkjet recording apparatus of the claim, particularly including and in combination with, the ridge portions located between the plurality of grooves have a round-shaped cross section.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Moscato et al. (US 20170253046 A1) teaches a wiping unit for an inkjet printer comprising v-shaped waste liquid guides. Ono et al. (US 20160129692 A1) teaches a sloped waste ink tray comprising a plurality of grooves to guide waste ink.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS RAY KNIEF whose telephone number is (703)756-5733. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM - 5 PM 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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 5712722149. 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.
/TRK/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights