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 without traverse of claims 1-4 in the reply filed on 5/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-8 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/13/2026.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on page 46, line 8, “pock” should be changed to -- pack --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Fig.15(b), “calcurating” should be changed to -- calculating -- (see reference 306). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show light scales 415a, 415b, and 415c as described in the specification (par. 101). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips (U.S. 2002/0141765) in view of Suzuki et al. (U.S. 2010/0202798).
Phillips teach an image forming apparatus 10 in which different capacity toner cartridges can be mounted (which would include a first and second toner cartridge having different capacities such as a first toner amount and a second toner amount); the image forming apparatus includes toner cartridges 31, inherently a mounting portion to mount the toner cartridges, an accommodating portion 31A (toner reservoir) to accommodate the supplied toner from the cartridges, a detecting portion 30 to output a value corresponding to the level of toner within the accommodating portion, a controller 36 to control the image forming apparatus, and a pixel counter 44 which counts the number of pixels in the printed image information so as to approximate a level of consumed toner. See Fig.1 and par. 4-5, 14-19. The remaining toner amount detected by the toner detector 30 is considered applicant’s “first remaining toner amount” and the remaining toner amount calculated by the pixel counter 44 is considered applicant’s “second toner remaining amount”.
The image forming apparatus uses both the toner detector 30 and the pixel counter 44 to determine the capacity of the toner cartridge mounted to the apparatus (par. 32, last sentence). Initially, the controller will assume the attached toner cartridge has an initial capacity (Fig.2, step 102). When the remaining amount of toner estimated by the pixel counter 44 is greater than the remaining amount of toner detected by the toner detector 30 (applicant’s second condition), the cartridge will be determined to be a small capacity cartridge and if the remaining amount of toner estimated by the pixel counter 44 is smaller than the remaining amount of toner detected by the toner detector 30 (applicant’s first condition), the cartridge will be determined to be a large capacity (see Fig.2, steps 104, 106,108, 110 par. 32). The controller will then correct the pixel count estimate of the remaining toner via a weighting factor according to which toner capacity toner cartridge has been mounted (Fig.2, steps 112,114, par. 33).
Regarding claim 4, Phillips teach that the toner detector 30 includes a light emitting and light receiving portion, the output value of the detector corresponding to the amount of light received.
Specifically, Phillips teach all that is claimed except changing the toner detector threshold value (instead of correcting the pixel count value) for determining the remaining capacity of the toner cartridge after the initial toner cartridge capacity determination has been made. Additionally, the light emitting/ light receiving toner detector’s output value being correlated with time (claim 4) is not explicitly taught.
Suzuki et al. teach an image forming apparatus 1 which uses different toner capacity developing cartridges 5B which are mountable to the image forming apparatus (see par. 100); the developing cartridges have a remaining amount toner sensor 81/82 to detect the remaining amount of toner within a reservoir of the cartridge (see par. 112-114, the detected remaining amount of toner is compared to a threshold value (125-126), a detecting unit 1200 will detected whether the mounted cartridge is a large capacity or small capacity cartridge (via cartridge protrusions or cartridge identification) (see par. 130), and determining unit 1110 will change the toner detector threshold value depending on whether the cartridge is determined to be large or small capacity (see par. 128-148). The remaining amount toner sensor uses a light emitter/light receiver 81/82 which correlates with a time in which light is received (see par. 112-127).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Phillips to additionally and/or alternatively change the threshold of the toner detector when it is determined that the installed cartridge is a large or small capacity cartridge because all the toner material in the toner cartridge can be properly used up until its deterioration state (empty state) by accurately determining the remaining amount of toner as taught by Suzuki et al. (see par. 7-9). Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a toner detector light emitting/light receiving detector that has an output value which correlates with time because such is a notoriously well known device to determine the amount of remaining toner as demonstrated by Suzuki et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 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.
Regarding claim 2, determining that the mounted toner container is the first toner container when the detected remaining toner output value is higher than a threshold and determining that the mounted container is the second toner container when the detected remaining toner output value is lower than a threshold; the threshold is lower when the first condition is satisfied as opposed to a case where the second condition is satisfied is not taught, suggested or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 3, changing the threshold such that it is different depending on a difference value between the first remaining toner amount and the second remaining toner amount is not taught, suggested or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ogawa et al. teach changing a threshold for a display depending on toner sensor output value and pixel count value. Suzuki teach discriminating a small or large capacity toner cartridge depending on toner sensor output value and pixel count value. Sakurai and Hama et al. teach discriminating a small or large capacity toner cartridge depending on physical projections or an attached memory ID. Ogawa et al., Suetsugu et al., Okawa et al., and Ito et al. are related applications.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT B BEATTY whose telephone number is (571) 272-2130. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 7 to 3.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Stephanie Bloss, can be reached on (571) 272-3555. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-2130.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ROBERT B BEATTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights