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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
At para. 0007, “…a first pressure chamber a volume of which changes…” and “…a second pressure chamber a volume of which changes…” is grammatically unclear. By comparison to the machine translation of the publication of the priority document, JP2025094421A, “…a volume of which changes…” for each instance is best understood as “… whose volume changes…” (at para. 0006).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 4 and 9, “a first pressure chamber a volume of which changes…” and “…a second pressure chamber a volume of which changes…” is grammatically unclear. As previously mentioned for para. 0007 of the specification, “…a volume of which changes…” for each instance is best understood as “… whose volume changes…” for examination purposes.
In claim 3, line 6-7, “…related to a difference between the first detection signal and the second detection signal…”, “the” should replace “a” for “a difference” because the difference is first recited and described in claim 1, starting at line 16.
In claim 8, lines 4 and 12, “a first pressure chamber a volume of which changes…” and “…a second pressure chamber a volume of which changes…” is grammatically unclear. As previously mentioned for para. 0007 of the specification, “…a volume of which changes…” for each instance is best understood as “… whose volume changes…” for examination purposes.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
At least claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 11-12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,426,998 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claimed invention is obvious over US 11426998 B2 as both inventions share the claim limitations as follows:
Present Application 18/978,555
U.S. Patent No. 11,426,998 B2
(1) a first piezoelectric element driven by a drive signal; a first pressure chamber whose volume changes in accordance with displacement of the first piezoelectric element;
(1) a first pressure chamber that applies pressure to a liquid; (1) a first energy generating element that generates energy that applies pressure to a liquid in the first pressure chamber; (1) a drive circuit that drives the first energy generating element … by applying a drive pulse;
(1) a second piezoelectric element driven by the drive signal; a second pressure chamber a whose volume changes in accordance with displacement of the second piezoelectric element;
(1) a second pressure chamber that applies pressure to a liquid; (1) a second energy generating element that generates energy that applies pressure to a liquid in the second pressure chamber; (1) a drive circuit that drives … the second energy generating element by applying a drive pulse;
(1) a nozzle flow path which communicates with the first pressure chamber and the second pressure chamber and which is provided with a nozzle configured to eject a liquid; and
(1) a nozzle flow path which communicates the first pressure chamber and the second pressure chamber and in which a nozzle that ejects a liquid is provided;
(1) a determination unit configured to determine a liquid state at the nozzle based … a first detection signal which represents a change in electromotive force of the first piezoelectric element in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the first pressure chamber after at least one of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element is driven, and a second detection signal which represents a change in electromotive force of the second piezoelectric element in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the second pressure chamber after at least another of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element is driven.
(1) a controller that controls … an operation of the detection circuit, wherein the controller drives the first energy generating element by the drive circuit, and performs a first detection operation of detecting the parameter in the second pressure chamber by the detection circuit
(11) a determination unit that determines an ejection state of a liquid from the nozzle based on the parameter or the physical property
(12) the controller drives the second energy generating element by the drive circuit, and performs a second detection operation of detecting the parameter in the first pressure chamber by the detection circuit, and wherein
the determination unit determines an ejection state of a liquid from the nozzle based on a detection result of the first detection operation and a detection result of the second detection operation.
The present invention’s claim differs in mentioning a liquid ejection apparatus as opposed to a liquid ejection head unit from the US Patent, and present invention’s claim has the determination unit determining the nozzle liquid state based on a difference between the first and second detection signals.
The US Patent disclosure describes the liquid ejection head unit as a part of a liquid ejection apparatus, and therefore the claims of the patent are directed to a part of a liquid ejection apparatus. Further, the determination of the liquid state being based on a difference between the first and second detection signals is described in the US Patent (at least col. 14, ll. 56-63 and col. 17, ll. 42-51).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the claimed invention such that the determination unit determines the liquid state based on a difference between the first and second detection signals for the purpose of determining the presence of an abnormality and such as ejection failure and/or eliminate noise for improved determination accuracy as taught in the US Patent (col. 17, ll. 49-56).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murayama (US 11426998 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Murayama discloses a liquid ejection apparatus (liquid ejection apparatus 100; Fig. 1) comprising:
a first piezoelectric element driven by a drive signal (first energy generating element, piezoelectric element 41 corresponding to pressure chamber Ca; col. 9, ll. 55-57; piezoelectric element Fig. 4; drive signal Com; col. 10, ll. 1-3; Fig. 2; piezoelectric element 41[1]; Fig. 5);
a first pressure chamber whose volume changes in accordance with displacement of the first piezoelectric element (pressure chamber Ca; col. 9, ll. 55-57; Fig. 4; expands and contracts with vibration by piezoelectric element 41; col. 10, ll. 1-5);
a second piezoelectric element driven by the drive signal (second energy generating element, piezoelectric element 41 corresponding to pressure chamber Cb; col. 9, ll. 58-60; Fig. 4; piezoelectric element 41[2]; Fig. 5);
a second pressure chamber whose volume changes in accordance with displacement of the second piezoelectric element (pressure chamber Cb; col. 9, ll. 58-60; Fig. 4; expands and contracts with vibration by piezoelectric element 41; col. 10, ll. 1-5);
a nozzle flow path which communicates with the first pressure chamber and the second pressure chamber and which is provided with a nozzle configured to eject a liquid (nozzle flow path Nf, nozzle N; Fig. 3); and
a determination unit configured to determine a liquid state at the nozzle (determination circuit 55; col. 14, ll. 6-8) based on a difference (difference between determination results for each detection operation; col. 14, ll. 59-63; col. 17, ll. 42-51; col. 18, ll. 13-14) between a first detection signal which represents a change in electromotive force of the first piezoelectric element in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the first pressure chamber after at least one of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element is driven, and a second detection signal which represents a change in electromotive force of the second piezoelectric element in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the second pressure chamber after at least another of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element is driven (electromotive force of piezoelectric element 41 as output signal Vout; col. 4, ll. 21-22 output signal Vout includes residual vibration signal NVT; col. 13, ll. 53-54; one case: first detection operation and second detection operation wherein one piezoelectric element is driven at a time, and the other pressure chamber is used for detection; col. 13, ll. 14-22; Fig. 7; col. 14, ll. 21-31; Fig. 9; another case: third detection operation wherein both piezoelectric element elements are driving at the same time with detection of associated with each pressure chamber, and the third operation may be used in combination with or without the other detection operations; col. 15, ll. 36-38; col. 17, ll. 63 – col. 18, ll. 10; Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 2, Murayama further discloses wherein a natural vibration period of a flow path from the first pressure chamber to the nozzle is equal to a natural vibration period of a flow path from the second pressure chamber to the nozzle (as understood from Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, vertical flow path Na1 with half of horizontal flow path Nf1 from pressure chamber Ca to nozzle N is equal to vertical flow path Na2 with half of horizontal flow path Nf1 from pressure chamber Cb to nozzle N, especially considering each vertical flow path may be omitted and the flow path Nf1 would be shared completely; col. 8, ll. 63 – col. 9, ll. 10).
Regarding claim 3, Murayama further discloses wherein the determination unit (determination circuit 55) receives the detection signals (NVT; Fig. 2), calculates the difference between the detection signals (detection results obtained by the detection operations), and determines that the liquid state (ink ejection state) when the difference is within a threshold value (when the difference is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, the ink ejection state is determined to be abnormal) (col. 14, ll. 59-63). Therefore, the determination unit acts as [having] both a difference detector and a difference determination unit.
Regarding claim 4, Murayama further discloses the liquid ejection apparatus as further comprising:
a drive controller configured to control supply of the drive signal to the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element, wherein the drive controller is configured to simultaneously supply the drive signal to the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element (drive circuit 45; col. 10, ll. 61-64; Fig. 10),
the first detection signal and the second detection signal are simultaneously input to the difference detector (third detection operation, both piezoelectric elements are driven at the same time, each resulting in associated detection results; col. 15, ll. 36-38; col. 17, ll. 63 – col. 18, ll. 10; Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 7, Murayama further discloses the liquid ejection apparatus as further comprising:
a drive controller configured to control supply of the drive signal to the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element (drive circuit 45; Fig. 2); and
a storage unit configured to store the first detection signal and the second detection signal (storage circuit 52; Fig. 2), wherein
the drive controller supplies the drive signal only to one of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element (first detection operation; col. 13, ll. 14-22; Fig. 7),
the storage unit stores the first detection signal in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the first pressure chamber after the drive signal is supplied only to one of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element (storage circuit 52 stores detection results; col. 15, ll. 1-2),
the drive controller supplies the drive signal only to another of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element (second detection operation; col. 14, ll. 21-31; Fig. 9),
the storage unit stores the second detection signal in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the second pressure chamber after the drive signal is supplied only to the other of the first piezoelectric element and the second piezoelectric element (storage circuit 52 stores detection results; col. 15, ll. 1-2), and
the determination unit determines the liquid state at the nozzle based on the difference between the first detection signal stored in the storage unit and the second detection signal stored in the storage unit (determination circuit 55 reads the detection results from the storage circuit 52; col. 15, ll. 1-2; determination calculates the difference between the detection results and uses that for determination of the ink ejection state; col. 14, ll. 59-63).
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama.
Regarding claim 5, Murayama teaches the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 3, wherein an amplifier circuit configured to amplify an amplitude of at least one of the first detection signal and the second detection signal (“the detection circuit 46 generates the residual vibration signal NVT by amplifying the output signal Vout after removing noise”; col. 4, ll. 38-40).
While Murayama does not teach the difference detector as having the amplifier circuit, specific indication of the placement of the amplifier circuit (being part of the determination circuit as opposed to part of the detection circuit) does not change its operation (to amplify the detection signal(s) being used for calculation of difference and determination of the nozzle state).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an amplifier circuit after the output of the original detection signals to amplify the detection signal(s) before being used for difference determination for the purpose of using the final amplitude of the detection signals to determine if there are specific issues, such as air bubbles or thickening, as taught by Murayama (col. 14, ll. 6-18)
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Otsuka (JP 2007185804 A).
Regarding claim 6, Murayama teaches the liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 3, however Murayama does not explicitly teach wherein the difference detector includes a phase delay circuit configured to delay a phase of at least one of the first detection signal and the second detection signal to make the first detection signal and the second detection signal coincide in phase with each other.
Otsuka teaches a liquid ejection apparatus (inkjet recording apparatus; at para. 0030) wherein a phase compensation processing unit for phase difference is used on at least a second detection signal (second sensor signal; at para. 0133, 0143) to remove a phase shift delay. Further, a delay circuit may be added for the signal with a leading phase (at para. 0141). After phase compensation processing, the detection signals are sent to a differential amplification processing unit to be used to determine if there is a nozzle abnormality (at para. 0144, 0145).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention as taught by Murayama to include phase delay compensation and/or a delay circuit for the purpose removing noise superimposed on the detection signals, detecting a plurality of sensors simultaneously, and increasing detection accuracy as taught by Otsuka (at para. 0010, 0028, 0148).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama in view of Matsuda (WO 2016042878 A1, from IDS).
Regarding claim 8, Murayama teaches a liquid ejection apparatus (liquid ejection apparatus 100; Fig. 1) comprising:
a first driving piezoelectric element driven by a drive signal (first energy generating element, piezoelectric element 41 corresponding to pressure chamber Ca; col. 9, ll. 55-57; piezoelectric element Fig. 4; drive signal Com; col. 10, ll. 1-3; Fig. 2; piezoelectric element 41[1]; Fig. 5);
a first pressure chamber whose volume changes in accordance with displacement of the first piezoelectric element (pressure chamber Ca; col. 9, ll. 55-57; Fig. 4; expands and contracts with vibration by piezoelectric element 41; col. 10, ll. 1-5);
a second driving piezoelectric element driven by the drive signal (second energy generating element, piezoelectric element 41 corresponding to pressure chamber Cb; col. 9, ll. 58-60; Fig. 4; piezoelectric element 41[2]; Fig. 5);
a second pressure chamber a whose volume changes in accordance with displacement of the second piezoelectric element (pressure chamber Cb; col. 9, ll. 58-60; Fig. 4; expands and contracts with vibration by piezoelectric element 41; col. 10, ll. 1-5);
a nozzle flow path which communicates with the first pressure chamber and the second pressure chamber and which is provided with a nozzle configured to eject a liquid (nozzle flow path Nf, nozzle N; Fig. 3); and
a determination unit configured to determine a liquid state at the nozzle (determination circuit 55; col. 14, ll. 6-8) based on a difference (difference between determination results for each detection operation; col. 14, ll. 59-63 and col. 17, ll. 42-51) between a first detection signal which represents a change in electromotive force of the first driving piezoelectric element in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the first pressure chamber after at least one of the first driving piezoelectric element and the second driving piezoelectric element is driven (second detection operation; col. 14, ll. 21-31; Fig. 9 electromotive force of piezoelectric element 41 as output signal Vout; col. 4, ll. 21-22 output signal Vout includes residual vibration signal NVT; col. 13, ll. 53-54), and a second detection signal which represents a change in electromotive force of the second driving piezoelectric element in accordance with a residual vibration generated in the liquid in the second pressure chamber after at least another of the first driving piezoelectric element and the second driving piezoelectric element is driven (first detection operation; col. 13, ll. 14-22; Fig. 7; electromotive force of piezoelectric element 41 as output signal Vout; col. 4, ll. 21-22 output signal Vout includes residual vibration signal NVT; col. 13, ll. 53-54).
Murayama does not teach the liquid ejection apparatus as further comprising a first detecting piezoelectric element configured to detect a vibration of a liquid in the first pressure chamber and a second detecting piezoelectric element configured to detect a vibration of the liquid in the second pressure chamber, and wherein the detection signals represent a change for the first and second detecting piezoelectric elements.
Matsuda teaches a configuration of a liquid ejection apparatus (inkjet printer 1; Fig. 1; ink-jet head 10C; Fig. 25, 26; at para. 0064) wherein each pressure chamber (pressure chamber 16a, 16d; Fig. 25, 26; at para. 0064) has not only a corresponding driving piezoelectric element (piezoelectric element 15a, 15c; Fig. 25) but also a detecting piezoelectric element (detection piezoelectric element 15b, 15d; Fig. 25, 26; at para. 0064). Further, the detection signals represent a change for the detecting piezoelectric elements (at para. 0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the liquid ejection apparatus as taught by Murayama to include a detecting piezoelectric element for each pressure chamber that sends the detection signal for the purpose of improved identification of which pressure chamber may have an abnormality and improving signal sensitivity as taught by Matsuda (at para. 0064).
Regarding claim 9, Murayama as modified by Matsuda teaches liquid ejection apparatus according to claim 8, and Matsuda further teaches wherein rigidity of the first detecting piezoelectric element is higher than rigidity of the first driving piezoelectric element, and rigidity of the second detecting piezoelectric element is higher than rigidity of the second driving piezoelectric element (from Fig. 3, detection piezoelectric element 15b is smaller than piezoelectric element 15a while having the same layers, therefore detection piezoelectric element 15b has less deformation area possible and higher rigidity).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the detecting piezoelectric elements to have a higher rigidity that the driving piezoelectric elements as it would be obvious to select a known material (with a known rigidity) based on its suitability for its intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ozawa (US 20200207083 A1, from IDS) discloses a liquid ejection apparatus resembling that of at least claim 1 (Fig. 3, 6, 7).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYRA M VAN KREUNINGEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9423. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 9:00am-6:00pm and Fri 9:00am-1:00pm.
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 X 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.
29 June 2026
/KYRA MELOR VAN KREUNINGEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights