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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on 2/21/25, the requirements 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) are met.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited on a Form PTO 1449 have been considered.
Specification
The specification has been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. However, the applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara (U.S. 2021/0229443 A1) in view of Akahane (U.S. 2005/0116992 A1).
Sugawara discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a liquid discharge head (18, §§0051-0059 and Figs. 2, 4) comprising:
a head (20, §0052 and Figs. 2, 4) to discharge a liquid;
a base (13, §0052 and Figs. 2, 4) holding the head, the base having a blind screw hole (62, §0052 and Figs. 8-9) having:
an inner circumferential face (Figs. 8-9); and
a bottom face (Figs. 8-9).
Regarding Claim 3, wherein the base has an opening (30, §0058 and Figs. 3-4, 8-9) on a first face of the base (e.g. the bottom face, Figs. 8-9), the head is fitted into the opening of the base (Figs. 8-9), and the blind screw hole is disposed on a second face of the base different from the first face (e.g. the top face, Figs. 8-9).
Regarding Claim 5, a head module (2, §0042 and Figs. 1-2) comprising: the liquid discharge head;
a head mount (54, §0079 and Figs. 4, 7-9) having a through hole (54a, §0079 and Figs. 7-9); and
a screw (71, §0060 and Figs. 1-6, 8-9) inserted into the blind screw hole via the through hole of the head mount to fix the liquid discharge head to the head mount.
Regarding Claim 6, a liquid discharge apparatus (1, §§0039-0045 and Fig. 1) comprising: the head module, to discharge the liquid to a medium; and
a conveyor (4, §§0042-0045 and Fig. 1) to convey the medium to the head module.
Regarding Claim 7, a liquid discharge apparatus (1, §§0039-0045 and Fig. 1) comprising: the head module, to discharge a liquid composition as the liquid to an object to form a layer on the object; and
a storage container (3, §0043 and Fig. 1) to store the liquid composition to be supplied to the head module.
Regarding independent Claim 8, a method of manufacturing a liquid discharge head (18, §§0051-0059 and Figs. 2, 4) comprising:
forming a blind screw hole (62, §0052 and Figs. 8-9) having an inner circumferential face and a bottom face in a base of the liquid discharge head.
Sugawara does not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a hydrophilic film covering the inner circumferential face and the bottom face of the blind screw hole.
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the hydrophilic film includes at least one of aluminum oxide or silicon dioxide.
Regarding Claim 4, a plating film on the hydrophilic film in the blind screw hole.
Regarding Claim 7, the layer to be formed to be an electrode material layer. However, recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus. Please see MPEP §2144 II.
Regarding independent Claim 8, forming a hydrophilic film on the inner circumferential face and the bottom face of the blind screw hole; and
forming a plating film on the hydrophilic film.
Akahane discloses the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a hydrophilic film covering the entirety of a surface of aluminum structural members of a composite liquid ejection head (20, 69, 8, 5, §0120; please note that both alumite treatment and nickel plating are known to make the surface of aluminum parts hydrophilic – see Tomita et al., U.S. 2002/0182538 A1, §0003, and Eguchi et al. U.S. 2005/0195238 A1, §0066; please also note that even without alumite treatment or plating, aluminum parts are made hydrophilic by being naturally oxidized by air, see Morin et al., U.S. 2002/0100694 A1, §0003, and Kellett, U.S. Pat. 6,196,129, col. 16, lines 1-19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the aluminum structural members of Akahane to the liquid discharge head of Sugawara to provide superior processability and corrosion resistance while maintaining low cost. Please note that applying the aluminum structural members of Akahane to the liquid discharge head of Sugawara would result in a hydrophilic film covering the inner circumferential face and the bottom face of the blind screw hole.
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the hydrophilic film includes at least one of aluminum oxide or silicon dioxide. Please note that aluminum parts are made hydrophilic by being naturally oxidized by air, see Morin et al. U.S. 2002/0100694 A1, §0003, and Kellett, U.S. Pat. 6,196,129, col. 16, lines 1-19. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the aluminum structural members of Akahane to the liquid discharge head of Sugawara to provide superior processability and corrosion resistance while maintaining low cost.
Regarding Claim 4, a plating film on the hydrophilic film in the blind screw hole (§0120; please also note that before plating, aluminum parts are made hydrophilic by being naturally oxidized by air, see Morin et al. U.S. 2002/0100694 A1, §0003, and Kellett, U.S. Pat. 6,196,129, col. 16, lines 1-19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the aluminum structural members of Akahane to the liquid discharge head of Sugawara to provide superior processability and corrosion resistance while maintaining low cost. Please note that applying the aluminum structural members of Akahane to the liquid discharge head of Sugawara would result in a plating film on the hydrophilic film in the blind screw hole.
Regarding independent Claim 8, forming a hydrophilic film on the inner circumferential face and the bottom face of the blind screw hole (§0120; please note that aluminum parts are made hydrophilic by being naturally oxidized by air, see Morin et al. U.S. 2002/0100694 A1, §0003, and Kellett, U.S. Pat. 6,196,129, col. 16, lines 1-19); and
forming a plating film on the hydrophilic film ($0120). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the aluminum structural members of Akahane to the liquid discharge head of Sugawara to provide superior processability and corrosion resistance while maintaining low cost.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV whose telephone number is (571)270-7049. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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 Rodrigues 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.
/ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/JASON S UHLENHAKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights