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 .
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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the control based on heat conductivity and control based on heat capacity, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The Title and Abstract of the application have been updated according to the amended Specification dated 06/26/2026. The objections to the Title and to the Abstract have been withdrawn.
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.
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: an image forming section, a first process member, a second process member introduced in claims 1, 13, and 14; a fixing member, a pressure member introduced in claims 4 and 7. Every term that is referred to as a “device”, “part”, “member”, “unit”, or “portion” to execute a function without sufficient structure, is being considered a generic placeholder reciting a means-plus-function limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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 § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 6,526,250 to Usui et al.
Usui teaches:
(claim 1) An image forming apparatus (Fig.4), comprising:
an image forming section (20) that forms an image on a recording medium (40) having a multilayer structure (Fig.5A, 5B);
a first process member (e.g., 511, 521) that physically acts on the recording medium from a first side on which the image is to be formed;
a second process member (512) that physically acts on the recording medium from a second side opposite to the first side; and,
a hardware processor (e.g., 512, 522) that
acquires information on a first property of an uppermost layer (e.g., 42) on a first side of the recording medium (material composition affecting viscosity of resin layer 42; col.13 line 12-15, col.19, lines 29-34, col.22 lines 10-15) and information on a second property of an uppermost layer (e.g., 41, 44) on a second side of the recording medium (material composition affecting heat capacity and temperature rise of base layer of recording medium 40; col.13 lines 16-20, col.19, lines 29-34, col.22 lines 10-15),
adjusts a physical property (e.g., temperature) of the first process member, the physical property acting on the recording medium, based on the first property, and (col.13 lines 4-11,col.22 lines 55-61)
adjusts a physical property (e.g., temperature) of the second process member, the physical property acting on the recording medium, based on the second property (col.13 lines 16-20,col.22 lines 55-61).
(claim 2) The image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first process member faces the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium, the second process member faces the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, and the hardware processor separately controls a physical quantity (e.g. temperature, pressure) of the first process member and a physical quantity of the second process member (Fig.6).
(claim 3) The image forming apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the first process member includes a fixing member (521) that fixes the image onto the recording medium, the second process member includes a pressure member (522) that makes the fixing member and the recording medium be in pressure contact with each other, and the hardware processor separately controls a temperature of the fixing member and a temperature of the pressure member (col. 14 lines 17-30).
(claim 6) The image forming apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the hardware processor controls a condition of the fixing member and a condition of the pressure member in accordance with a surrounding temperature and/or a temperature of the recording medium (col. 15 lines 21-23, col.25, lines 19-24).
(claim 7) The image forming apparatus according to claim 2, further comprising: a fixing member (521) that fixes the image onto the recording medium; and a pressure member (522) that makes the fixing member and the recording medium be in pressure contact with each other, wherein the first process member (511) and the second process member (512) are preliminary heaters that heat the recording medium upstream of the fixing member and the pressure member in a conveyance direction (Fig.6).
(claim 8) The image forming apparatus according to claim 3, further comprising a preliminary heater (61) that heats the recording medium upstream of the fixing member and the pressure member in a conveyance direction, wherein the hardware processor controls the preliminary heater to assist heating of the recording medium by the fixing member and the pressure member (col.14 lines 11-15).
(claim 13) Usui teaches the claimed method, since it has been held that when the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
(claim 14) Usui inherently discloses (see col.21 lines 5-10) a non-transitory recording medium storing a computer-readable program for an image forming apparatus, wherein the image forming apparatus includes: an image forming section that forms an image on a recording medium having a multilayer structure; a hardware processor; a first process member that physically acts on the recording medium from a first side on which the image is to be formed; and a second process member that physically acts on the recording medium from a second side opposite to the first side, and the program causes the hardware processor to: acquire information on a first property of an uppermost layer on a first side of the recording medium and information on a second property of an uppermost layer on a second side of the recording medium adjust a physical property of since comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a program executable by a processor is an inherent feature present in any image forming system having a control unit to control its operation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,526,250 to Usui et al.
Regarding claim 4, Usui further teaches a temperature of the first process member set such that both a toner image T and the resin layer 42 of the recording medium are in soften/melted state (i.e., at melting temperature or higher) such that the toner is embedded into the resin layer. Since melting temperature is reached by absorption of heat by the layer, and heat absorption is deterred by high heat conductivity. Usui further teaches a temperature of the second process member set as to prevent moisture in the inside of the recording medium to evaporate and transform into bubbles (i.e., blisters), which causes a picture quality defect. An amount of heat from the non-image bearing side to the inside of the recording medium is determined by the heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure an image forming apparatus according to claim 3 such that first property is a heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium and the second property is a heat capacity of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, and the hardware processor controls the temperature of the fixing member in a direct relationship with respect to the heat capacity of the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium and/or controls the temperature of the pressure member in a direct relationship with respect to the heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, for at least the purpose of producing high speed images with excellent gloss while preventing image quality defects due the blistering (col.4 lines 34-49).
Regarding claim 5, Usui further teaches a temperature of the first process member set such that resin layer 42 of the recording medium is in soften/melted state (i.e., at melting temperature or higher). Since melting temperature is reached by absorption of heat by the layer, it is determined by its heat capacity. Usui further teaches a temperature of the second process member set such a temperature rise of the recording medium at the non-image bearing side and the evaporation of moisture in the inside of the recording medium is prevented; heat absorption is determined by the heat capacity of the base layer. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure an image forming apparatus according to claim 3 such that the first property is a heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium and the second property is a heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, and the hardware processor controls the temperature of the fixing member in a direct relationship with respect to the heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium and/or controls the temperature of the pressure member in a direct relationship with respect to the heat conductivity of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, for at least the purpose of producing high speed images with excellent gloss while preventing image quality defects due the blistering (col.4 lines 34-49).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,526,250 to Usui et al., as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of US 6,163,662 to Martin et al.
Regarding claim 9, Usui teaches an image forming apparatus according to claim 7 but appears silent about controlling temperature according a surrounding temperature. Martin discloses in an image forming apparatus, two variables in printing media that affect the effective temperature in the fuser nip are basis weight and water content. These two variables manifest themselves as differences in dielectric thickness, heat capacity and thermal conductivity for a given media in an environment. Therefore, the image forming apparatus includes sensors adjacent the media path and configured to determine the qualitative characteristic of the media and to generate a signal indicative of the qualitative characteristic; and a fuser adjacent the media path and configured to adjust a fusing parameter responsive to the signal and to fuse the developing material corresponding to the image to the media and according to the fusing parameter. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the image forming apparatus of Usui such that the hardware processor controls a temperature of the preliminary heater in accordance with a surrounding temperature and/or a temperature of the recording medium, for at least the purpose of more accurately determining critical characteristics of the recording medium that affect image quality.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,526,250 to Usui et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2007/0065187 to Kodera et al.
Regarding claim 10, Oonishi teaches an image forming apparatus according to claim 3 but appears silent about continuous paper. Kodera discloses an image forming apparatus (150, Fig.2) that uses a belt-shaped recording medium as the recording medium, as alternative configuration to an image-forming apparatus (100, FIG. 1) that uses a recording medium-feeding tray 117. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as art recognized equivalent, performing a same function, in substantially the same way, and producing substantially the same results.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,526,250 to Usui et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 5,905,925 to Kawabata et al.
Regarding claim 11, Usui teaches an image forming apparatus according to claim 1. Examiner assumes arguendo that Usui is silent about an operation unit, as claimed.
Kawabata teaches to set operating conditions for an image forming apparatus according to characteristics of the recording medium, the characteristics may be entered, selected, or measured during transport; the characteristic values such as the electric resistance value and the heat capacity of the recording medium may be directly entered or the thickness, basis weight, etc. (col. 7 lines 10-40). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the image forming apparatus Usui to further comprise an operation part that receives, by an input operation, information on at least the first property of the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium and the second property of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, wherein the hardware processor acquires the information received by the operation part, for at least the purpose of enabling an image to be formed appropriately on not only a transfer material of a single composition such as paper or an OHP sheet, but also a transfer material of a multilayer structure.
Regarding claim 12, Usui teaches an image forming apparatus according to claim 1, but appears silent about a detector, as claimed. Kawabata teaches to set operating conditions for an image forming apparatus according to characteristics of the recording medium, the characteristics may be entered, selected, or measured during transport; the characteristic values such as the electric resistance value and the heat capacity of the recording medium may be directly entered or the thickness, basis weight, etc. (col. 7 lines 10-40). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the image forming apparatus Usui to further comprise a detector that detects information on at least the first property of the uppermost layer on the first side of the recording medium and the second property of the uppermost layer on the second side of the recording medium, wherein the hardware processor acquires the information detected by the detector, for at least the purpose of enabling an image to be formed appropriately on not only a transfer material of a single composition such as paper or an OHP sheet, but also a transfer material of a multilayer structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/26/2026, with respect to the objection to the Drawings have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/26/2026, with respect to Kawabata have been fully considered and are persuasive. This rejection of claims 1, 2, and 11-14 under 35 USC 102 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/26/2026, with respect to Oonishi have been fully considered and are persuasive. This rejection of claims 1-6 and 11-14 under 35 USC 102 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/26/2026, with respect to Usui have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicants point to the features of claim 1 that they believe to be allowable and state that the cited art fails to teach these features. The Office respectfully disagrees and the rejection has been presented above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARLENE HEREDIA whose telephone number is (571)272-8393. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30-5:30.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/Arlene Heredia Ocasio/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights