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 of Japan Application No. 2024-047972 was received on 04 March 2025 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 13 January 2025 and 05 October 2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 13 January 2025 are accepted.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: The claims disclose “the first vibrating part includes a central part at which the walls of the pressure chambers are formed.” The limitation “a central part” requires a reference number. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: The claims disclose “the first vibrating part includes a central part at which the walls of the pressure chambers are formed.” The limitation “a central part” requires a reference number. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
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)(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, 4-5, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ohta et al. (US 5,818,482), hereinafter Ohta.
With regard to Claim 1, Ohta discloses a liquid ejection head (Abstract) comprising:
a nozzle plate (Fig. 1, nozzle plate 16) including a plurality of nozzles (Fig. 1; nozzles 15) from which liquid is ejected (Abstract);
a first substrate facing the nozzle plate and in which a plurality of pressure chambers each communicating with a corresponding one of the nozzles are formed (Fig. 4; ink passage member 13; Col. 9, Lines 43-50); and
a first vibrating plate (12; Fig. 4) on the first substrate (13), forming walls of the pressure chambers (ink chamber 17; Fig. 4), and capable of vibrating to cause the liquid to be ejected from each of the nozzles independently (Col. 7, Lines 47-65), wherein
the first vibrating plate (Fig. 14; oscillation plate 12) includes a central part at which the walls of the pressure chambers are formed and a pair of thin-wall parts by which the central part is sandwiched (Fig. 4, as shown), a thickness of the thin-wall parts being smaller than that of the central part (Fig. 4, as shown).
With regard to Claim 4, Ohta further discloses a manifold plate (substrate 3 and/or frame 5; Fig. 2) in which a flow channel of the liquid is formed (ink supply hole 3a/5c), wherein the first vibrating plate (12) is sandwiched between the first substrate (13) and the manifold plate (3/5; Figs. 1-4; 20-24).
With regard to Claim 5, Ohta further discloses an adhesive layer (adhesive agent layer 6; Col. 5; Figs. 3-4, 20-24) between the manifold plate and the first substate at and outside each of the thin-wall parts of the first vibrating plate layer (adhesive agent layer 6; Col. 5; Figs. 3-4, 20-24.
With regard to Claim 7, Ohta further discloses wherein the nozzles are arranged in a first direction (Figs. 1, 4), and each of the thin-wall parts (Fig. 3) extends in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (See Figs. 3 and 4).
With regard to Claim 8, Ohta further discloses wherein the first substrate and the first vibrating plate form a plurality of flow channels that communicate with the pressure chambers (Figs. 2-4).
With regard to Claim 9, Ohta further discloses a plurality of piezoelectric elements (Abstract; piezos 4) each configured to vary pressure in a corresponding one of the pressure chambers (Col. 5), wherein each of the piezoelectric elements contacts the wall of the corresponding pressure chamber (Fig. 3-4, piezos 4 contact exterior wall of ink supply chamber, the external wall being the vibrating plate 12).
With regard to Claim 10, Ohta further discloses a second substrate between the nozzle plate and the first substate and forming flow channels through which the liquid can flow from common liquid chambers to the pressure chambers (Figs. 3, 25, 29, common ink channel 44; first and second substrates 40 and 41; pressure chamber 17; nozzle plate 16).
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 11, 14-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takabe et al. (US PGPub 2021/0146686 A1), hereinafter Takabe, in view of Ohta.
With regard to Claim 11, Takabe discloses a liquid ejection apparatus (Fig. 1; apparatus 100; ¶0020) comprising:
a conveyer configured to convey a medium (¶0020, 0023; transport mechanism 60; Fig. 1); and
a liquid ejection head configured to eject liquid onto the conveyed medium (¶0024-0025), the liquid ejection head including:
a nozzle plate including a plurality of nozzles from which liquid is ejected (¶0028, nozzle plate 46; Figs 2-3),
the first vibrating plate includes a central part at which the walls of the pressure chambers are formed (Fig. 3 vibrating plate 24; ¶0037-0043) and a pair of thin-wall parts by which the central part is sandwiched, a thickness of the thin-wall parts being smaller than that of the central part (Figs. 4, 20-12).
However, Takabe does not explicitly disclose a first substrate facing the nozzle plate and in which a plurality of pressure chambers each communicating with a corresponding one of the nozzles are formed, and a first vibrating plate on the first substrate, forming walls of the pressure chambers, and capable of vibrating to cause the liquid to be ejected from each of the nozzles independently.
The secondary reference of Ohta discloses a first substrate facing the nozzle plate and in which a plurality of pressure chambers each communicating with a corresponding one of the nozzles are formed (Fig. 4; ink passage member 13; Col. 9, Lines 43-50); and a first vibrating plate (12; Fig. 4) on the first substrate (13), forming walls of the pressure chambers (ink chamber 17; Fig. 4), and capable of vibrating to cause the liquid to be ejected from each of the nozzles independently (Col. 7, Lines 47-65), wherein the first vibrating plate (Fig. 14; oscillation plate 12) includes a central part at which the walls of the pressure chambers are formed and a pair of thin-wall parts by which the central part is sandwiched (Fig. 4, as shown), a thickness of the thin-wall parts being smaller than that of the central part (Fig. 4, as shown).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the substrate arrangement of Ohta, with the head of Takabe, in order to increase an efficiency of ink discharging from nozzles without producing the interference of adjacent ink chambers and realizes a high-frequency piezoelectric actuation needed for the practical use, as taught by Ohta (Co. 2, Lines 61-Col. 3, Line 3).
With regard to Claim 14, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 4 above; therefore claim 14 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 4.
With regard to Claim 15, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 5 above; therefore claim 15 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 5.
With regard to Claim 17, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 7 above; therefore claim 17 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 7.
With regard to Claim 18, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 8 above; therefore claim 18 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 8.
With regard to Claim 19, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 9 above; therefore claim 19 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 9.
With regard to Claim 20, this claim recites limitations that are similar and in the same scope of invention as claim 10 above; therefore claim 20 is rejected for the same rejection rationale/basis as described in claim 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 2 is that applicants claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having wherein in a first direction along which the nozzles are arranged, a length of the first vibrating plate is shorter than a length of the first substrate and the nozzle plate. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 3 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 3 is that applicants claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having a second vibrating plate on the first substrate, wherein the nozzles are arranged in a plurality of rows including first and second rows, the first vibrating plate faces the nozzles in the first row, and the second vibrating plate faces the nozzles in the second row. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 6 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 6 is that applicants claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having wherein in a first direction along which the nozzles are arranged, a length of the first vibrating plate is shorter than a length of the manifold plate. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 12 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 12 is that applicants claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having wherein in a first direction along which the nozzles are arranged, a length of the first vibrating plate is shorter than a length of the first substrate and the nozzle plate. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 13 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 13 is that applicants claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having a second vibrating plate on the first substrate, wherein the nozzles are arranged in a plurality of rows including first and second rows, the first vibrating plate faces the nozzles in the first row, and the second vibrating plate faces the nozzles in the second row. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 16 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 16 is that applicants claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having wherein in a first direction along which the nozzles are arranged, a length of the first vibrating plate is shorter than a length of the manifold plate. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT A. RICHMOND whose telephone number is (313)446-6547. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6:00 PM.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SCOTT A RICHMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights