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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the undue length. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 1-10 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.
Claim 1, lines 6, 11, and 15, recites “the drive device”. While appearing in singular form, proper antecedent basis of the recitation is unclear due to earlier recitation in lines 3-4 of “…a single drive device or a plurality of drive devices…”. As understood from the specification, either form of “the drive device” is possible (a single drive device or a plurality) for the general configuration. Therefore, the claim will be examined such that each instance of “the drive device” may be either a singular drive device or a plurality of drive devices. It is suggested to amend the claim to clearly indicate the possibility of either singularity or plurality for each recitation.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1. Claims 5 and 6 are further rejected on the same basis as claim 1 (recitation of “the drive device”).
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 3, line 5, recites “the plurality of drive devices arranged side by side along the first direction” which interferes with the prior recitation in the claim, line 3, wherein there may be either “the single drive device or the plurality of drive devices”. Claims 3 is dependent on claim 2 which explicitly recites the plurality, and figure 9 appears to best demonstrate the claim with a plurality or drive devices with a clear perpendicular bisector, therefore claim 3 will be presently examined such that “the single drive device or” is not recited.
Claim 4 is rejected for its dependency on claim 3.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 2, 5, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. (US 20030063449 A1), hereinafter referred to as Suzuki.
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki discloses A liquid jet head (printhead unit 17; Fig. 2, 3) comprising:
a jet section including a plurality of nozzles configured to jet a liquid (printheads 19, 20 with nozzle rows 7A-D; Fig. 2);
a drive board (flexible printed circuit boards 24, 25 connected to circuit board 21; Fig. 2) having a first surface on which a single drive device or a plurality of drive devices for outputting a drive signal for jetting the liquid from the nozzles to the jet section is disposed (IC chips 22, 23 on flexible printed circuit boards 24, 25 generate voltage to drive piezoelectric actuation 220 in print heads 19, 20; at para. 0036; Fig. 2, 6);
a heat radiation member which is disposed at the first surface side in the drive board, and which is configured to cool the drive device (heat sink 26 contacts IC chips 22, 23; at para. 0061; Fig. 3, 6);
a pressing member which is disposed at a second surface side opposed to the first surface in the drive board (head holder 18 with elastic member rest 29, and elastic member 27 adhered to elastic member rest 29; at para. 0043; Fig. 6, 7), and which is configured to press the drive board against the heat radiation member (elastic member 27 urges IC chips 22, 23 connected to flexible printed circuit boards 24, 25 against heat sink 26; at para. 0061; Fig. 6; rib 35c of head holder 18 presses flexible printed circuit 25 and circuit board 21 against heat sink 27; portion of Fig. 6 annotated below);
and a fixation part configured to fix a part of the pressing member to the drive board (ribs 35a, 35b of head holder 18 contact the circuit board 21, and rib 35c may be sealed to flexible printed circuit boards 24, 25; at para. 0042; Fig. 6, 7; alternatively, cylindrical portions 36a, 37c go through holes 21a, 21b circuit board 21 and are crushed flat; at para. 0040; portion of Fig. 6 annotated below);
wherein an arrangement area of the drive device extends along a first direction in the first surface (portion of Fig. 2 annotated below), and
the fixation part is disposed in a region along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction in the first surface with reference to an arrangement position of the drive device (portion of Fig. 6 annotated below).
PNG
media_image1.png
599
560
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
342
700
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Suzuki discloses The liquid jet head according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of drive devices is arranged side by side along the first direction in the arrangement area of the drive devices (IC chips 24, 25; portion of Fig. 2 annotated above)
Regarding claim 5, Suzuki discloses the liquid jet head according to claim 1, wherein the fixation part is disposed in a region along a perpendicular bisector with respect to a side along the first direction in the drive device in the first surface (perpendicular bisector is in the second direction, and fixation part, specifically with rib 35c, is in a region along the second direction; portions of Fig. 2 and Fig. 7 annotated below).
PNG
media_image3.png
342
700
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
368
524
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Suzuki discloses a liquid jet recording apparatus (ink-jet printer 1; Fig. 1) comprising the liquid jet head according to claim 1.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Nishi (US 5739836 A).
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki teaches the liquid jet head according to claim 2, wherein the fixation part is disposed in a region along the second direction (fixation part is in a region along the second direction; portion of Fig. 6 annotated above for claim 5).
However, Suzuki does not teach the fixation part with reference to the arrangement position of the plurality of drive devices being closest to a perpendicular bisector with respect to a side along the first direction in the first surface of the drive board out of the plurality of drive devices arranged side by side along the first direction (while ribs 35a-35c may be considered close to the perpendicular bisector as may be seen in the portion of Fig. 6 annotated above, the cylindrical portions 36a, 37a are disposed closer to the edges of the circuit board 21).
Nishi teaches an array of drive devices (drive ICs 4 on head circuit board 2; col. 3, ll. 17-19; Fig. 1, 3) on one side of a drive board (control circuit board 1; Fig. 1, 3) with a heat radiating member on the same side (heat sink plate 6; Fig. 1, 3) and a pressing member on the opposite side of the drive board (head of screw 15; Fig. 3). A fixation part (threads of screw 15, hole in control circuit board 1, and threaded bores 14; Fig. 3, 5) pressed the drive board against the heat radiation member. The fixation part is also closest to a perpendicular bisector as opposed to the outer edges of the drive board (Fig. 1 annotated below).
PNG
media_image5.png
666
975
media_image5.png
Greyscale
*The examiner notes that while a perpendicular bisector was taken with respect to the entire array of drive devices. An example is understood such that if there were only two drive devices, such as done for Suzuki, the individual bisectors for each drive device would be even closer to each fixation part.
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 fixation part taught by Suzuki to position the fixation part closer to the perpendicular bisector for the purpose of providing the fixation part away from connection terminals (Fig. 1 shows screws 15 disposed in an area different from connection parts 5, 9, and 16) and to fix in place the heat radiating member to the drive board (col. 4, ll. 1-2) as taught by Nishi.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Nishi as applied to claim 3 above, and supported by Yoshida (US 20220097361 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki as modified by Nishi teaches the liquid jet head according to claim 3, however Suzuki does not teach wherein the number of drive devices is an odd number, and while Nishi teaches a plurality (array) of drive devices, Nishi does not explicitly teach the number of drive devices as odd.
However, because Nishi teaches an array, it is clear that only two scenarios exist: the total number of drive devices is even, or the total number of drive devices is odd. Because there are a highly limited number of possibilities, it would have been obvious to try a case wherein an odd number of drive devices are used.
Yoshida demonstrates both scenarios of using an odd number of drive devices (main embodiment uses five drive devices; Fig 4A, 4B, and 5; modified example 2 uses three drive devices; Fig. 10) and using an even number of drive devices (modified example 1 uses two drive devices; Fig. 9; modified example 3 uses four drive devices; Fig. 11). Further, Yoshida notes that each of the modified examples (using two to four drive devices) have substantially the same function as that of the main embodiment (using five drive devices) (at para. 0103).
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 amount of drive devices taught by Suzuki and/or Nishi to be able to be an odd number as taught by Yoshida because there are a limited number of possibilities (either even or odd) and even when using more or less drive devices, the function remains substantially the same (Yoshida; at para. 0103).
Claim(s) 6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki as applied to claims 1 and 5 above, and further in view of Kondo (US 20200269580 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Suzuki teaches liquid jet head according to claim 5, wherein the fixation part is disposed in a region including a wiring line of the drive signal input from the drive device in the first surface (signal wires 51; fixation parts and drive signal input are on the side of the circuit board 21 with respect to IC chips 22, 23; Fig. 6, 9B, 9C, 14).
However, Suzuki does not teach wherein the fixation part is disposed in a region including a wiring line of the drive signal output from the drive device in the first surface (no fixation part seems to appear on the side of output wires 53; Fig. 6, 9B, 9C; while circuit board 25 appears to contact head holder 18 on the signal output side near the printhead 20, it appears to not be sealed or fixed as visible or disclosed for other areas; Fig. 6).
Kondo teaches wherein fixation parts for fixing a drive board to another part are disposed on both the input and output sides of drive devices (screws 502 are both above and below drive signal generation circuit 51, one closer to the top/input side, and one closer to the bottom/head chip 3 side ; drive signal generation circuit 51 output a drive signal Com to head chip 3; at para. 0031; Fig. 5).
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 fixation parts as taught by Suzuki to also be clearly disposed on the drive signal output side region for the purpose of stably fixing the drive board to another part as taught by Kondo (at para. 0093).
Regarding claim 9, Suzuki teaches liquid jet head according to claim 1, wherein part of the drive board is a flexible board (flexible printed circuit board 24, 25), however a part of the drive board wherein the drive devices are not disposed is not taught as flexible (circuit board 21).
Kondo teaches wherein a part of a drive board wherein drive devices are not disposed may be flexible (wiring board 501 is flexible; at para. 0047; wiring member 38 may be rigid or flexible; at para. 0091; Fig. 5).
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 parts of the drive board wherein the drive devices are not disposed as taught by Suzuki to be flexible for the purpose of increasing range for arrangement of parts connected to the drive board while maintaining stable connection as taught by Kondo (at para. 0091).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ono et al. (US 6317150 B1), hereinafter referred to as Ono.
Regarding claim 7, Suzuki teaches liquid jet head according to claim 1, wherein the fixation part is configured to include
a first through hole disposed on the drive board (holes 21a, b; at para. 0040; Fig. 13, 16), and
a fixation member which is inserted into the first through hole, and which is configured to fix the drive board and the pressing member to each other (cylindrical portions 36a, 37a on protrusions 36, 37; at para. 0040; Fig. 2, 7, 16).
Suzuki does not teach wherein there is a second through hole disposed on the pressing member. Suzuki instead teaches wherein the pressing member has protrusions (protrusions 36, 37; at para. 0040; Fig. 2, 7, 16).
Ono teaches a configuration for a fixation part wherein the fixation part is configured to include
a first through hole disposed on a drive board (bores 3a on circuit board 3; Fig. 2),
a second through hole disposed on a pressing member, though protrusions of the pressing member (through-holes 11a on protection cover 10 through bosses 11; Fig. 2), and
a fixation member which is inserted into each of the first through hole and the second through hole, and which is configured to fix the drive board and the pressing member to each other (bolts 13; Fig. 3).
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 protrusions on the pressing member as taught by Suzuki by including holes in the protrusions of the pressing member wherein a fixing member may go through both a hole in the drive board and a hole in the pressing member for the purpose of more firmly attaching the pressing member to the heat member through the board as taught by Ono (col. 3, ll. 63-65; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Suzuki as modified by Ona teaches liquid jet head according to claim 7, and Ono teaches wherein an electrical contact part between the drive board and the fixation member is not disposed on a periphery of the first through hole (there is not no electrical contact between the circuit board 3 and bolts 13 on periphery; gap between sides of bolts 13 and holes 3a; portion of Fig. 3 annotated below).
PNG
media_image6.png
359
450
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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 liquid jet head as taught by Suzuki and Ono wherein an electrical contact part is not disposed on a periphery of the first through hole for the purpose of allowing loose receiving of the fixation member before firm attachment as taught by Ono (col. 3, ll. 52-65).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Takahama (US 20240100828 A1 and US 20240100829 A1) appear to teach a liquid jet head relevant to at least claims 1-6 and 10 (Fig. 3). These publications show an earlier effective filing date than the claimed invention. While they do share the same applicant/assignee with the claimed invention, they have a different inventor and may be considered prior art under 35 USC 102(a)(2) at present.
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.
17 June 2026
/KYRA MELOR VAN KREUNINGEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights