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.
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) 1-2, and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami et al. (2023/0202185) (hereinafter Murakami et al.) in view of Ishida et al. (2019/0001689) (hereinafter Ishida et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Murakami et al. teaches a liquid ejecting head (50, Fig. 1) [Paragraph 0021] comprising: nozzles configured to eject a liquid; a common liquid chamber communicating with the nozzles (N, Fig. 4) [Paragraphs 0028 and 0045]; a filter (540, Fig. 5) partitioning the common liquid chamber (R, Fig. 5) into an upstream chamber (UR) and a downstream chamber (DR) [Paragraph 0058]; a flexible member (54d, Fig. 5) defining the downstream chamber (DR) of the common liquid chamber (R) [Paragraphs 0058 and 0078].
Murakami et al. fails to teach a detection section configured to detect a position of the flexible member, wherein the flexible member disposed between the downstream chamber and the detection section.
Ishida et al. teaches a detection section (i.e. the material below the flexible portion in Fig. 4) configured to detect a position of the flexible member, wherein the flexible member disposed between the downstream chamber and the detection section [Paragraphs 0052, 0054, and 0070].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a detection section configured to detect a position of the flexible member, wherein the flexible member disposed between the downstream chamber and the detection section as taught by Murakami et al. as modified Ishida et al. for the purposes of detecting the pressure condition of the liquid ejecting head due to the displacement (i.e. position) of the flexible member [Ishida et al., Paragraph 0070].
Regarding Claim 2, Murakami et al. teaches the liquid ejecting head (50) [Paragraphs 0021, 0028, 0045, 0058, and 0078].
Murakami et al. fails to teach wherein the detection section is disposed in a central portion of the flexible member in a longitudinal direction of the common liquid chamber.
Ishida et al. teaches wherein the detection section is disposed in a central portion of the flexible member in a longitudinal direction of the common liquid chamber [Paragraphs 0052, 0054, 0070, see also Fig. 4].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the detection section is disposed in a central portion of the flexible member in a longitudinal direction of the common liquid chamber as taught by Murakami et al. as modified Ishida et al. for the purposes of detecting the pressure condition of the liquid ejecting head due to the displacement (i.e. position) of the flexible member [Ishida et al., Paragraph 0070].
Regarding Claim 6, Murakami et al. teaches the liquid ejecting head (50) [Paragraphs 0021, 0028, 0045, 0058, and 0078].
Ishida et al. teaches a flexible member [Paragraphs 0052, 0054, 0070, see also Fig. 4].
Ishida et al. fails to teach wherein a bending rigidity of the flexible member is smaller than a bending rigidity of the filter [Paragraphs 0069 and 0078].
Murakami et al. further teaches wherein a bending rigidity of the flexible member (54d) is smaller than a bending rigidity of the filter (540) [Paragraphs 0069 and 0078].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein a bending rigidity of the flexible member is smaller than a bending rigidity of the filter as taught by Murakami et a. as modified by Ishida et al. for the purposes of absorbing the pressure fluctuations of the ink in the common liquid chamber [Murakami et al., Paragraph 0078].
Regarding Claim 7, Murakami et al. teaches the liquid ejecting head (50) [Paragraphs 0021, 0028, 0045, 0058, and 0078].
Murakami et al. fails to teach wherein the detection section is disposed on a surface of the flexible member that faces away from the downstream chamber.
Ishida et al. teaches wherein the detection section is disposed on a surface of the flexible member that faces away from the downstream chamber [Paragraphs 0052, 0054, 0070, see also Fig. 4].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the detection section is disposed on a surface of the flexible member that faces away from the downstream chamber as taught by Murakami et al. as modified Ishida et al. for the purposes of detecting the pressure condition of the liquid ejecting head due to the displacement (i.e. position) of the flexible member [Ishida et al., Paragraph 0070].
Regarding Claim 8, Murakami et al. teaches a liquid ejecting apparatus (100, Fig. 1) [Paragraph 0021] comprising the liquid ejecting head (50) according to claim 1 [Murakami et al., Paragraphs 0021, 0028, 0045, 0058, and 0078 and Ishida et al., Paragraphs 0052, 0054, and 0070].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the liquid ejecting head as taught by Murakami et al. as modified Ishida et al. for the purposes of suppressing an increase in liquid pressure loss [Murakami et al., Paragraph 0131] and suppressing vibration when an excessive pressure is applied to a liquid ejecting head, so a crack in a vibration plate can be suppressed [Ishida et al., Paragraph 0006].
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami et al. (2023/0202185) (hereinafter Murakami et al.) in view of Ishida et al. (2019/0001689) (hereinafter Ishida et al.) as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Japanese Patent Application Publication No. (JP S59115856 A) (hereinafter JP S59115856 A).
Regarding Claim 3, Murakami et al. and Ishida et al. teach the liquid ejecting head (50) [Murakami et al., Paragraphs 0021, 0028, 0045, 0058, and 0078 and Ishida et al., Paragraphs 0052, 0054, and 0070].
Murakami et al. and Ishida et al. fails to teach wherein the detection section is a strain gauge.
JP S59115856 A) teaches wherein the detection section is a strain gauge [Detailed Description of the Invention].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the detection section is a strain gauge as taught by Murakami et al. as modified by Ishida et al. and JP S59115856 A for the purposes of liquid pressure detection of ink [JP S59115856 A, Detailed Description of the Invention].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 9-13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for the allowance of claims 4-5 is the inclusion of the limitation of liquid ejecting head that includes a conductive frame member defining a compliance space allowing displacement of a flexible member, wherein the flexible member is between a downstream chamber and frame member and a detection section includes a beam portion coupling outer peripheral frame portion that define the compliance space of the frame member. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination, that has not been found, taught, or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
The primary reason for the allowance of claims 9-13 is the inclusion of the method of detecting a state of the liquid ejecting head that includes the method steps of estimating a degree of clogging of a filter on the basis of first information on a detection section detecting a position of a flexible member before applying pressure into a common liquid chamber and second information on the detection section detecting the position of the flexible member while applying pressure into the common liquid chamber. It is these steps found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination, that has not been found, taught, or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA SOLOMON whose telephone number is (571)272-1701. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30am -6pm, EST.
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 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.
/LISA SOLOMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights