Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
2. Claims 10, 12, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 6,330,419 (Sano et al.) (hereinafter “Sano”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0087241 (Ahn) (hereinafter “Ahn”).
Regarding claim 10, Figs. 1-2, 4 and 10A-10C of Sano show a sheet discharging apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
a supporting portion (7) configured to support a sheet;
a first roller (including 15 and 15a) configured to rotate about a first rotational axis (axis of 15a) extending in a first axial direction; and
a second roller (including 80 and unnumbered axle on righthand side in Fig. 10B) configured to rotate about a second rotational axis (axis of unnumbered axle in Fig. 10B) extending in a second axial direction and configured to discharge the sheet toward the supporting portion (7) together with the first roller (including 15 and 15a),
wherein the second roller (including 80 and unnumbered axle on righthand side in Fig. 10B) includes:
a roller portion (80) that is arranged at a position in the second axial direction, and that includes a circumference surface (outer surface) configured to abut against the first roller (including 15 and 15a) such that a discharge nip is formed with the first roller (including 15 and 15a),
wherein the circumference surface (outer surface) includes a first end (lefthand end), and a second end (righthand end) opposite to the first end (lefthand end) in the second axial direction,
wherein, in a state where a rotation radius (Dd) of the circumference surface (outer surface) at the first end (lefthand end) is referred to as a first radius, and a rotation radius (Dc) of the circumference surface (outer surface) at the second end (righthand end) is referred to as a second radius,
the circumference surface (outer surface) is inclined with respect to the second axial direction such that the first radius (Dd) is greater than the second radius (Dc). Sano teaches most of the feature of this claim, but does not show a pushing surface, as claimed. Likewise, Sano does not show that the roller portion is arranged in a position different from the pushing surface, and doesn’t show that a rotation radius of the pushing surface is greater than the first radius, as claimed.
Ahn shows that it is well-known in the art to provide a sheet discharging device (Fig. 3) with a roller portion (186 on righthand side in Fig. 8) and a pushing surface (194 on lefthand side of roller portion 186) that extends in a direction intersecting a virtual circle having a rotational axis (axis of element 188 in Fig. 8) as a center when viewed in an axial direction, the pushing surface (194 on lefthand side of roller portion 186) being configured to push a sheet toward a supporting portion (101 in Fig. 3);
wherein a distance between a first end (lefthand end) of the roller portion (186) and the pushing surface (194 on lefthand side of roller portion 186) in the axial direction is shorter than a distance between a second end (righthand end) of the roller portion (186) and the pushing surface (194 on lefthand side of roller portion 186) in the axial direction,
a rotation radius of the pushing surface (194 on lefthand side of roller portion 186) is greater than a first radius of first end; and
the roller portion (186) is arranged at a position different from the pushing surface (194 on lefthand side of roller portion 186) in the axial direction. Numbered paragraph [0056] explains that this arrangement in Fig. 8 allows paper to be smoothly discharged to the outside. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the Sano apparatus with a pushing surface arrangement, for the purpose of smoothly discharging paper to the outside, as taught by Sano. Providing the Sano apparatus with a pushing surface, in a manner as taught by Fig. 8 of Ahn, results in the roller portion being arranged at the position different from the pushing surface in the second axial direction, as claimed.
Regarding claim 12, Figs. 8-9 of Ahn show that the second roller (including 186 and 194) includes a surface (vertical surface of 195 in Fig. 9) that is arranged at a position different from the roller portion (186) in the axial direction (axial direction of element 188), and
wherein the surface (vertical surface of 196 in Fig. 9) is configured to extend in a direction intersecting the axial direction (axial direction of element 188), and is configured to face an upstream side in a rotational direction in which the second roller (including 186 and 194) rotates while discharging the sheet toward the supporting portion (101 in Fig. 3) together with a first roller (including 183 and 181). This same arrangement would be provided on the Sano apparatus, according to the teachings of Ahn.
Regarding claim 14, Fig. 4 of Sano shows that the second roller (including 15 and 15a) is configured relatively movably with respect to the first roller (including 80 and unnumbered axle on righthand side in Fig. 10B).
Regarding claim 15, lines 48-53 in column 10 of Sano teaches a drive source configured to drive the first roller (including 15 and 15a),
wherein the second roller (including 80 and unnumbered axle on righthand side in Fig. 10B) is driven to be rotated by abutting against the first roller (including 15 and 15a).
Regarding claim 16, Figs. 1-2, 4 and 10A-10C of Sano show that at least a portion of the second rotational axis (axis of unnumbered axle in Fig. 10B) is closer to at least a portion of the supporting portion (7) in a horizontal direction than the first rotational axis (axis of element 15a).
Regarding claim 17, Sano teaches all of the limitations of this claim, except for the second rotational axis being positioned below the first rotational axis in a vertical direction, as claimed. Rather, Sano shows the second rotational axis (axis of unnumbered axle in Fig. 10B) of a driven roller above the first rotational axis (axis of 15a) of a drive roller. On the other hand, Fig. 8 of Ahn shows that it is well-known in the art to provide a discharging apparatus with first and second axes that are reversed compared to the first and second axes of Sano, but also perform the same function as that of Sano. In particular, Ahn shows a first drive roller (including 181 and 183) with a first rotational axis (axis of 181) and a second driven roller (including 188, 186 and 194) with a second rotational axis (axis of element 188) positioned below a first rotational axis (axis of 181) in a vertical direction. Because both Ahn and Sano teach roller arrangements for discharging sheets, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the reversed first and second axis arrangement of Ahn for the first and second axis arrangement of Sano to achieve the predictable result of discharging sheets.
Regarding claim 18, Figs. 1-2, 4 and 10A-10C of Sano show an image forming apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
an image forming unit (including 5, 20 and N1) configured to form an image on a sheet; and
the sheet discharging apparatus according to claim 10 configured to discharge the sheet on which the image has been formed by the image forming unit (including 5, 20 and N1).
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 1-9 and 19-27 are allowed. Claims 11 and 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 different claimed combinations of the first radius, the second radius, the third radius and the fourth radius in independent claim 1 are patentably distinct from the prior art of record. The different claimed combinations of the first radius, the second radius, and the rotation radius of the pushing surface in independent claim 19 are patentably distinct from the prior art of record.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Japanese Publication No. 11-157718 shows a supporting portion (20), a first roller (22), a second roller (including 23a, 26 and 26) with a first surface / pushing surface (surface on one element 26), a second surface (surface on other element 26), and a roller portion (23a), but does not show the combination of different radii, as claimed.
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS A MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Mike 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.
/THOMAS A MORRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights