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 .
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: “supply section”, printing-related section”, “printing section”, “fixing section”, “recovery section”, “imaging section”, and “control section” in claims 1-2, 5-6, and 8-9; and “supply section”, printing-related section”, “first printing section”, “second printing section”, “first fixing section”, “second fixing section”, “recovery section”, “imaging section”, and “control section” in claims 3-4, 7, and 10-13.
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.
Claims 1-13 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.
Referring to claims 1 and 3:
These claims recite that both respective error ranges of a distance in the conveyance direction and a distance in the width direction between the print image (7, 9) in the first print data (DT1, DT1a, DT4) and the print image (7, 9) printed on the basis of the second print data (DT2) are within ± 1.0 mm.
It is clear which feature of the printing apparatus allows an error range below 1.0 mm to be obtained. The same feature is disclosed in the description (par. 78), but according to this paragraph the claimed error range is always obtained by following the correction method (resizing of the image to be printed) as disclosed with respect to in Fig. 6. The expansion/contraction ratio applied to the original print data gives origin to a modified print data which compensates for the expansion/contraction of the print medium caused by the printing and curing process. The whole description conveys the impression that the claimed error range relies on the fact that the expansion/contraction of a print medium is always the same or at least within a limited range, but it is not clear which feature of the printing apparatus guarantees the repeatability of the expansion/contraction phenomenon within the claimed error range. The claimed feature noted above is a result to be achieved and does not limit the scope of the claims, i.e., how the features of the printing apparatus are limited.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) / 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Maeyama et al (US 20210146701 A1).
Referring to claim 1:
Maeyama et al disclose a printing apparatus [100, Fig. 1] comprising:
a supply section [201] for supplying a medium;
a printing-related section [204] including a printing section [210] for printing at least a print image on the medium on the basis of print data and a fixing section [205] for fixing the print image on the medium to obtain a print medium;
a recovery section [207] for recovering the print medium;
an imaging section [211], arranged between the printing-related section and the recovery section, for imaging the print medium; and
a control section [101] for controlling the printing, wherein
the print data is first print data [target image size, Fig. 3A] or second print data [corrected image size, Fig. 3B],
the control section includes at least
first transmission means [S1, Fig. 4] for transmitting a printing start command to the printing section on the basis of first print data having a plurality of marks [M, Fig. 3A] put on the print image,
imaging means [S2] for causing the imaging section to image the print medium to acquire imaging data,
measurement means [S3] for measuring a distance in a conveyance direction between the marks and a distance in a width direction between the marks in the imaging data, to acquire an imaging measurement value including respective values of the distances,
calculation means [S4] for calculating an expansion/contraction ratio from a reference measurement value including respective values of a distance in the conveyance direction between the marks and a distance in the width direction between the marks in the first print data and the imaging measurement value,
correction means for expanding and contracting the print image on the basis of the expansion/contraction ratio to generate the second print data, [par. 53: implied in the case of single-side printing] and
second transmission means for transmitting a printing start command to the printing section on the basis of the second print data, and
both respective error ranges of a distance in the conveyance direction and a distance in the width direction between the print image in the first print data and the print image printed on the basis of the second print data are within± 1.0 mm. [as explain in the 112(b) rejection, this feature has not been considered as limiting the scope of the claim].
Referring to claim 2:
Maeyama et al disclose the claimed detailed calculation of the expansion/contraction ratio disclosed [par. 48-49: implied in the resizing procedure].
Referring to claim 5:
Maeyama et al disclose marks respectively provided at four corners of the print image [Fig. 3A].
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 3-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Kaneko et al (WO 2022185479 A1).
Referring to claims 3-4:
Maeyama et al discloses what is set forth in these claims as applied above with respect to claims 1-2, but does not disclose the second printing and fixing sections and the additional control (transmission, imaging, measurement, calculation, and correction) that would implicitly result . However, Kaneko et al disclose first and second printing sections 120A and 120B and first and second drying or fixing sections 110A and 110B (see Fig. 4). Those of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that by applying the elements used for the first printing and fixing sections in Maeyama et al to second printing and fixing sections as seen in Kaneko et al, each element merely performing the same function in combination as they do separately, would have had the same predictable and desirable results. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have expanded what Maeyama et al teach in view of Kaneko et al whereby, for both the first printing and fixing sections and the second printing and fixing sections, the deviation between an input image and an output image formed on a recording medium due to expansion and contraction of the printing medium during printing is measured, calculated, and corrected.
Referring to claim 10:
Maeyama et al disclose marks respectively provided at four corners of the print image [Fig. 3A].
Claims 6-8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al as applied to claim 1 above, or Maeyama et al and Kaneko et al applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Saita (US 20110316925 A1) and well-known prior art (MPEP 2144.03).
Referring to claims 6-8, 11, and 12:
While not disclose by Maeyama et al, it is well-known in the prior art to use many different types of markings, lines, notches, and the like at the corners and sides and in different relative directions (vertical / horizontal) and at different spacings or positions on a print medium for measuring alignment and/or for calibration in a printer. Saita discloses an example of using spaced vertical / horizontal expansion-contraction reference marks (Fig. 2: 22A-22D, 22G-22H). Those of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized, for the known problem of measuring print medium properties, given the specific related problem or need in Maeyama et al, i.e., measuring contraction/expansion of a sheet in two dimensions, and having a finite number of identified / predictable potential solutions to that need or problem, to have pursued known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified either Maeyama et al, or the combination of Maeyama et al and Kaneko et al, in view of the well-known prior art, to have used horizontal and vertical markings at notched corners within even a commonly narrow margin of 12.7 mm with printed image, which 10 mm would provide, in order to accurately measure print medium contraction/expansion in two dimensions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but 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. Referring to these claims, the prior art searched and of record neither anticipates nor suggests the limitations added in the claimed combinations.
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 (i.e., a descriptive title that distinguishes the invention and is not a generic or general description). The new title should take into account any amendments to the claims to best indicate the claimed invention.
The title must be as short and specific as possible (see 37 CFR 1.72(a)), distilling a description of the claimed invention into as few words as possible to capture the essence of the claimed invention. Rather than reciting statutory categories (apparatus, method, product) and some generic descriptor (e.g., information processing), a title that is specific, but characterizes the essence or key aspect(s) of the claimed invention, should be submitted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/17/24 and on 8/25/25 were each filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the statements have been considered by the examiner.
Applicant has provided an explanation of relevance of cited document in the first IDS on pages 1-2 of the specification.
The relevance of the cited documents in the second IDS, in addition to any applied above, can be found in the European Search Report and Written Opinion from the EPO dated 20 May 2025 for EP Application No. 24217007 (of record).
Cited Art
The prior art and other references made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tanigawa et al (US 8995006 B2) disclose an image forming apparatus includes an image reading section that reads an image on paper to generate image data, and an image forming section that forms on paper an image based on image data. The image forming section forms on paper a dimension correction image including marks. The image forming section includes a computation unit that performs computation using dimension correction image data, obtained by reading the dimension correction image, to generate dimension correction data, and a memory that stores the dimension correction data. The image forming section corrects image data using the stored dimension correction data and forms an image based on the corrected image data. The computation unit has a first computation mode of generating first dimension correction data based on distances between the marks and a second computation mode of generating second dimension correction data based on distances between edges of paper and the marks.
Yoshida et al (US 10752025 B2) disclose a base material processing apparatus includes a first edge sensor, a second edge sensor, and a displacement amount calculation part. The first edge sensor acquires a first detection result (R1) by detecting the position of an edge of a base material in the width direction at a first detection position. The second edge sensor acquires a second detection result (R2) by detecting the position of the edge of the base material in the width direction at a second detection position. The displacement amount calculation part calculates the amount of displacement in the position of the base material in the transport direction on the basis of the first detection result (R1) and the second detection result (R2). Accordingly, the amount of displacement in the position of the base material in the transport direction can be detected without depending on images such as register marks.
Shima et al (US 20030164958 A1) disclose an image forming apparatus includes a print head (2) controllably driven according to print data; a heater device (HU) for applying thermal energy to a recording medium (1) in order to fix ink applied on its surface layer by the print head onto its fixing layer (11); and a controller (7) for producing the print data from image data. The controller (7) includes a deformation compensating section (9) for compensating for displacement between a target image and a fixed image due to size change in the vertical and/or lateral direction of the recording medium occurring in association with application of the thermal energy thereto. The controller (7) includes also a fixing color development characteristics compensating section (92) for effecting fixing color development characteristics compensation during the production of the print data from the image data, based on fixing color development characteristics of the ink to the fixing layer dependent on the thermal energy and a heat absorption rate compensating section (96) for compensating for a difference in a color-dependent heat absorption rate for a radiant heat beam during the production of the print data from the image data.
Narumi et al (US 20260097595 A1) disclose a printing apparatus which performs drying between a first printing unit and a second printing unit calculates a first amount of registration misalignment between the printing units based on a pattern printed in a first area for detecting a registration misalignment between the printing units and amounts of registration misalignment within print heads of the printing units. Based on the calculated first amount of registration misalignment and a pattern printed in a second area for detecting a registration misalignment between the printing units, the printing apparatus calculates a second amount of registration misalignment between the printing units resulting from expansion or contraction of the sheet in its conveyance direction due to heating and cooling. The printing apparatus performs a scaling process on image data for the first printing unit or adjusts the ejection frequency of the print head of the first printing unit according to the calculated second amount of registration misalignment.
Takahashi (US 20200086659 A1) discloses a printing apparatus for printing on a front surface of a printing medium, and thereafter printing on a back surface of the printing medium. The apparatus includes the following elements: a front surface print head for printing a cue mark, and printing a front surface image based on front surface image data with reference to the cue mark; a back surface image data corrector for creating corrected back surface image data based on elasticity information in a transport direction after printing of the front surface image; a detector for detecting the cue mark; and a back surface print head for printing the corrected back surface image data on the back surface of the printing medium with reference to the cue mark detected by the detector.
Takahashi (US 20210221152 A1) discloses that after printing cue marks and front surface images on the front surface of web paper by a printing station, an image data elongation-contraction processor creates corrected back surface image data based on elasticity information, and a printing station prints back surface images based on the corrected back surface image data, on the back surface of the printing medium. At this time, a page interval calculator calculates a page interval from an interval between the cue marks detected by a detector, and a difference computing unit calculates differences between the page interval and image size in a transport direction of the corrected back surface image data. Since these differences indicate shifts of the correction based on the elasticity information, optimal elasticity information can be set by revising the elasticity information with these differences through a setting unit. Consequently, the operator of the apparatus can easily set optimal elasticity information based on the differences.
Takahashi et al (US 20210287061 A1) disclose a printing apparatus for printing on a front surface of a printing medium, and thereafter printing on a back surface of the printing medium. The apparatus includes the following elements: a front surface print head for printing a front surface image based on front surface image data, over a surface page length on the front surface of the printing medium; a back surface print head for printing a back surface image based on back surface image data, on the back surface of the printing medium; a data corrector for creating corrected front surface image data by correcting an image size of the front surface image data based on elasticity information in the transport direction; and a printing controller for causing printing based on the corrected front surface image data, and controlling the back surface print head to perform printing on the back surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott Rogers whose telephone number is 571-272-7467. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am to 7 pm flex.
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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached on 571-270-5254. 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 the Patent Center. Unpublished application information in the Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in the Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about the 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.
/Scott A Rogers/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
19 September 2026
Prosecution Insights