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
1. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1,2,5-8,10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawakami USP 11,383,951.
Kawakami discloses, regarding claim 1, A medium processing apparatus comprising:
a liquid applier (86) to perform liquid application on a medium;
a post-processing device (82,130) to perform a binding process on:
a media bundle including the medium subjected to the liquid application by the liquid applier; or
a medium not subjected to the liquid application; and
circuitry configured to control operations of the liquid applier and the post-processing device according to operation modes,
wherein the operation modes of the post-processing device include:
a first mode to perform the binding process on the media bundle including the medium on which the liquid application is performed; and
a second mode to perform the binding process on the medium on which the liquid application is not performed (see at least C6/L1-6, C11/L40-51).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the post-processing device includes a crimper (82,130) to press and deform a part of the medium or a part of the media bundle to perform the binding process, and
the circuitry is further configured to control the crimper to press and deform the part of the medium in the second mode (see at least C6/L1-6, C11/L40-51).
Regarding claim 5, further comprising an operation selector (26; fig.19) configured to select the operation modes, wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the operation modes from the first mode to the second mode in response to a selection selected via the operation selector (see at least C11/L40-51).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the circuitry is further configured to automatically change the operation modes from the first mode to the second mode in response to the selection selected via the operation selector (the change is made via a user on a setting screen as discussed in C11/L49-51).
Regarding claim 7, wherein the circuitry is further configured to control the post-processing device to perform the second mode after controlling the liquid applier to perform the liquid application (this is true if the first stack of sheets to be bound when the number of sheets in the stack exceeds a predetermined number, and if the second stack of sheets to be bound when the number of sheets in the stack is equal to or less than the predetermined number, as shown in at least C16/L27-35).
Regarding claim 8, wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the operation modes from the first mode to the second mode in response to the selection manually selected via the operation selector (C11/L49-51).
Regarding claim 10, An image forming system comprising:
an image forming apparatus to form an image on a medium (see at least C3/L9-11); and
the medium processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawakami USP 11,383,951 in view of Takahashi et al. USP 9,440,478.
Kawakami discloses substantially all the limitations of the claims (see ¶ above), but does not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 4.
Takahashi teaches the use of a separation assembly (21) to: separate the media bundle bound by the post-processing device from the post-processing device; or separate the medium from the post-processing device (fig.1,16).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide a separation assembly to: separate the media bundle bound by the post-processing device from the post-processing device; or separate the medium from the post-processing device, as taught by Takahashi, in the device of Kawakami, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of preventing the bound sheet bundle from sticking to either the top or bottom teeth of the crimper (C14/L15-21).
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 3,9 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.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Abe et al. (USP 12,172,861) discloses a medium processing apparatus comprising a post-processing device and a liquid applier, wherein operation modes of the post-processing device include: a first mode to perform the binding process on the media bundle including the medium on which the liquid application is performed; and
a second mode to perform the binding process on the medium on which the liquid application is not performed (see at least fig.23,24).
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESLIE A. NICHOLSON III whose telephone number is (571)272-5487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4.
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, Michael C McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/LESLIE A NICHOLSON III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653 6/26/2026
Prosecution Insights