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.
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 Objections
Claims 1, 4, & 9 are objected to because of the following grammatical informalities and/or improper phrasing:
Claim 1: “the control unit is configured to further performs, when performing the third ejection control, the third ejection control…”. Phrasing is grammatically incorrect and self-referential.
Claim 4: “when performing recording on a first medium and a second medium following the first medium, the control unit performs the third ejection control”. Because the third ejection control occurs via the liquid ejecting unit, the third ejection control cannot be performed while performing recording as these are two conflicting tasks. Therefore, Applicant is required to amend phrasing to clarify limitations. To enable compact prosecution and examine Claim 4 within this office action, the Examiner has assumed that the Applicant intended to describe elements associated with a multi-step process of operating the device, including performing the following three distinct tasks in the provided order: recording onto a first medium, performing the third ejection control, and recording onto a second medium.
Claim 9: “the control unit uses the liquid ejection amount…”. It appears the Applicant intended to use the word “amounts”, given two amounts are referenced in the claim. Note that without pluralization, the claim would be indefinite as to which ejection amount is being referenced. Therefore, the claim will be interpreted by the Examiner as “the control unit uses the liquid ejection amounts…”.
Claim 12: “the nozzle having a long non-ejection period among the plurality of nozzles”, wherein “the” should be corrected to “a”. It appears Applicant is referring to a newly defined nozzle among the plurality of nozzles and therefore the use of “the” would not be proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 8 is 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 8 recites the limitation "the threshold value" which is defined as “a first threshold value” and “a second threshold value”. It appears that this is referencing “a predetermined threshold value” as claimed in Claim 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation of “the threshold value”, which is being defined as two values in Claim 8.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 1-2, 4, 6, 9, & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakagami (US 20080094459 A1) in view of Tamaki & Taira (US 20120194605 A1; herein referred to as “Tamaki”).
With respect to Claim 1, Sakagami teaches a liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract), comprising:
a support portion configured to support a medium (i.e., “transport belt 1” supporting “print medium 2”; Sakagami: ¶0045, ¶0048, & Fig. 1);
a liquid ejecting unit including a plurality of nozzles from which liquid is ejected onto the medium supported by the support portion (i.e., “ink jet heads 11” with a “plurality of nozzles” which eject on the “print medium 2” supported on “1”; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1);
a transport unit configured to transport the medium between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., “a paper pressure roller 9” with the “driven roller 4” and “charging roller 7” to transport the medium “2” between the support portion “1” and the liquid ejecting unit “11”; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1); and
a control unit (i.e., a “control unit 31” which “includes a CPU 32…that performs various kinds of controls and operation processing” in tandem with driving circuits such as “35”, “36”, “45”, “39”, etc.; Sakagami: ¶0049, ¶0059, & Fig. 6) configured to control the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., “ink jet heads 11” driven by “ink jet head driving circuit 35”; Sakagami: ¶0059 & Fig. 6) and the transport unit (i.e., “power supply 8” powering the “charging roller 7” driven by “high-voltage power supply control circuit 36”; Sakagami: Fig. 6 & Fig. 1), wherein
the control unit (i.e., “control unit 31”; Sakagami: ¶0049 & Fig. 6) is configured to perform, as control for ejecting the liquid from the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., “ink jet heads 11”; Fig. 6),
a first ejection control for performing recording on the medium (i.e., “printing” in which “the ink droplets are discharged from the ink jet head” onto a print medium; Sakagami: ¶0059 & ¶0010),
a second ejection control for performing maintenance of the liquid ejecting unit, the second ejection control being a different control from the first ejection control (i.e., “flushing”; Sakagami: ¶0059), and
a third ejection control for turning the liquid into mist between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion, the third ejection control being a different control from the first ejection control and the second ejection control (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, Sakagami is teaching the liquid ejection unit “11” can be controlled by the control unit “31” to perform activities including discharging mist towards the support portion “1” and therefore the misting is occurring between liquid ejecting unit “11” and the support portion “1”.
the control unit (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct printing; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059) is configured to further performs…feeding the medium between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., printing by conveying the “print medium 2” on the “transport belt 1” to pass under the “ink jet heads 11”; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1).
Sakagami is silent on the control unit is configured to further performs, when performing the third ejection control, the third ejection control before feeding the medium between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit.
Tamaki teaches the control unit is configured to further performs, when performing the third ejection control, the third ejection control before feeding the medium between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., see control path in annotated Tamaki’s Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note that the control path configuration/order involving “S106 RECORDING” in Tamaki’s Fig. 9 is modifying the pass printing taught by Sakagami (Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the third ejection control as taught by Sakagami (thereby increasing the humidity of the internal printing environment) before performing recording (i.e., an order taught by Tamaki), because this creates an optimal humidity within the printer in which the recording can occur (i.e., “appropriately humidifying ejection openings” in order to maintain proper viscosity of the ink in those openings; Tamaki: ¶0007 & ¶0059).
With respect to Claim 2, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, comprising
a humidity detector configured to detect a humidity inside the device (i.e., “electric moisture percentage measuring apparatus”; Sakagami: ¶0064),
wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, the third ejection control is causing the liquid ejection unit to act as a humidifier of the environment.
Sakagami is silent on wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control when a humidity acquired by the humidity detector is lower than a predetermined threshold value.
Tamaki teaches wherein the control unit (i.e., “maintenance controlling section 64”; Tamaki: ¶0063 & Fig. 9-10) performs the third ejection control when a humidity acquired by the humidity detector is lower than a predetermined threshold value (i.e., control step “S205” as shown in Fig. 10, a part of “S104” or “S108” as shown in Fig. 9, “where the humidity detected by the humidity sensor 58 is equal to or lower than the predetermined value, the supply amount of the humid air may be corrected to be made larger” and then, as shown in Fig. 9, initiates “S109”, the supplying of humid air; Tamaki: ¶0078 & Fig. 9-10). In other words, Tamaki teaches the control unit “64” can use a predetermined threshold value to determine if the supply amount of humid air should be “made larger”, for example increasing from zero time of supplying to activating “S109” to supply humid air.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the third ejection control (thereby increasing the humidity of the internal printing environment) when a humidity acquired by the humidity detector is lower than a predetermined threshold value, because this ensures the internal printing environmental is “corrected” to a humidity optimal for printing (Tamaki: ¶0078).
With respect to Claim 4, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1. Sakagami also teaches the device’s following configurations/elements (also see discussion in Objections section):
….performing recording on a first medium (i.e., “printing” in which “the ink droplets are discharged from the ink jet head” onto a sheet “print medium 2” that is being conveyed on the “transport belt 1” to pass under the “ink jet heads 11”; Sakagami: ¶0059, ¶0048, ¶0010, & Fig. 1, see conveyance arrow) and a second medium (i.e., “print medium 2” stored in the “paper feed unit 10” to later be fed onto the “transport belt 1” for recording; Sakagami: ¶0047 & Fig. 1)
the control unit performs the third ejection control… (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059)
the first medium is located downstream from between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion in a transport direction, and the second medium is located upstream from between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion in the transport direction (see annotated Sakagami Fig. 1 below with first medium post-recording and storage of second medium in “paper feed unit 10” & ¶0047-0049).
PNG
media_image2.png
463
924
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sakagami is silent on when performing recording on a first medium and a second medium following the first medium, the control unit performs the third ejection control in a state in which the first medium is located downstream from between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion in a transport direction, and the second medium is located upstream from between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion in the transport direction.
Tamaki teaches when performing recording on a first medium and a second medium following the first medium (i.e., performing two rounds of “S106 recording”, wherein each round of recording is the performance of recording as taught by Sakagami; see control path in annotated Tamaki Fig. 9 below), the control unit performs the third ejection control in a state in which the first medium is located downstream from between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion in a transport direction, and the second medium is located upstream from between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion in the transport direction (see annotated Tamaki Fig. 9, wherein the device performs “S109 starting to supply humid air” [which is associated with performing of third ejection control as taught by Sakagami modified by Tamaki] in between performing two rounds of “S106 recording”). Note that the control path configuration/order involving “S106 RECORDING” in Tamaki’s Fig. 9 is modifying the pass printing process taught by Sakagami (Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
586
1231
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the control unit to perform the third ejection control while the first and second mediums are oriented as specified in the claim, because this enables the device to efficiently operate the third ejection control between rounds of recording without that ejected mist landing on the mediums (i.e., the first medium which has already obtained a recorded image or the second medium which will obtain a recorded image). Ensuring the mediums are avoiding this ejected mist from the third ejection control avoids negatively impacting the quality of the printed products.
With respect to Claim 6, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, wherein a droplet ejected in the third ejection control is smaller than a droplet ejected in the first ejection control and a droplet ejected in the second ejection control (i.e., “mist of ink”; Sakagami: ¶0059 & ¶0010). The phrasing “mist of ink” indicates smaller droplet size than the phrasing of “ink droplets” being referred to for the first ejection control of discharging ink droplets onto a print medium. Similarly, the phrasing “mist of ink” indicates smaller droplet size than the phrase “flushing” (aka the second ejection control) which involves “discharging ink droplets”.
With respect to Claim 9, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1,
comprising a humidity detector configured to detect a humidity inside the device (i.e., “electric moisture percentage measuring apparatus”; Sakagami: ¶0064).
a liquid ejection amount in the third ejection control when the humidity is a first humidity is defined as a first ejection amount (i.e., Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, the third ejection control is causing the liquid ejection unit to act as a humidifier of the environment by ejecting an amount of mist. The humidity of the environment when this is occurring can be defined as “first humidity”.
Sakagami is silent on wherein
a liquid ejection amount in the third ejection control when the humidity is a second humidity lower than the first humidity is defined as a second ejection amount,
the second ejection amount being larger than the first ejection amount, and
the control unit uses the liquid ejection amount according to the humidity detected by the humidity detector in the third ejection control.
Tamaki teaches
a liquid ejection amount in the third ejection control when the humidity is a second humidity lower than the first humidity is defined as a second ejection amount (i.e., “supply amount of humid air” that “may be increased” or “corrected to be made larger” when a humidity is below a predetermined value; Tamaki: ¶0078 & Fig. 9-10). This detected humidity that needed to be corrected can be defined as the “second humidity” which is being compared to a predetermined value, such as the “first humidity” taught by Sakagami.
the second ejection amount being larger than the first ejection amount (i.e., “supply amount of humid air” that “may be increased” or “corrected to be made larger” when a humidity is below a predetermined value; Tamaki: ¶0078 & Fig. 9-10). In other words, because the second humidity taught by Tamaki is below the first humidity taught by Sakagami, Tamaki teaches the “supply amount of humid air” would be increased, increasing the first ejection amount taught by Sakagami to an amount we can define as “second ejection amount”.
and the control unit uses the liquid ejection amount according to the humidity detected by the humidity detector in the third ejection control (i.e., control step “S205 correcting supply time based on humidity” as shown in Fig. 10, a part of “S104” or “S108” as shown in Fig. 9, “where the humidity detected by the humidity sensor 58 is equal to or lower than the predetermined value, the supply amount of the humid air may be corrected to be made larger” and then, as shown in Fig. 9, initiates “S109”, the supplying of humid air; Tamaki: ¶0078 & Fig. 9-10). In other words, Tamaki teaches that the liquid ejection amount (i.e., the “supply amount of humid air”; Tamaki: ¶0078 & Fig. 9-10) can be varied based on the detected humidity (Tamaki: ¶0078 & Fig. 9-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a control unit using liquid ejection amounts as claimed above, because this is routine optimization of the humidity of the internal device’s environment using real-time humidity sensing data, wherein this more optimized internal humidity decreases the risk of “drying of the ink in the nozzles” which can occur in less optimized environments (Tamaki: ¶0006).
With respect to Claim 13, Sakagami teaches a liquid ejecting method for a liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer” performing printing, flushing, etc.; Sakagami: Abstract, ¶0059 & ¶0010), the device comprising:
a support portion configured to support a medium (i.e., “transport belt 1” supporting “print medium 2”; Sakagami: ¶0045, ¶0048, & Fig. 1);
a liquid ejecting unit including a plurality of nozzles from which liquid is ejected onto the medium supported by the support portion (i.e., “ink jet heads 11” with a “plurality of nozzles” which eject on the “print medium 2” supported on “1”; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1); and
a transport unit configured to transport the medium between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., “a paper pressure roller 9” with the “driven roller 4” and “charging roller 7” to transport the medium “2” between the support portion “1” and the liquid ejecting unit “11”; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1),
the liquid ejecting method being configured to perform, as processing of ejecting the liquid from the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., the “ink jet heads 11” performing printing, flushing, etc.; Sakagami: Abstract, ¶0059 & ¶0010),
first ejection processing for performing recording on the medium (i.e., “printing” in which “the ink droplets are discharged from the ink jet head” onto a print medium; Sakagami: ¶0059 & ¶0010),
second ejection processing for performing maintenance of the liquid ejecting unit, the second ejection processing being different processing from the first ejection processing (i.e., “flushing”; Sakagami: ¶0059), and
third ejection processing for turning the liquid into mist between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion, the third ejection processing being different processing from the first ejection processing and the second ejection processing, (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, Sakagami is teaching the liquid ejection unit “11” can be controlled by the control unit “31” to perform activities including discharging mist towards the support portion “1” and therefore the misting is occurring between liquid ejecting unit “11” and the support portion “1”.
Sakagami is silent on wherein when the third ejection processing is performed, the third ejection processing is performed before the medium is fed between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit.
Tamaki teaches wherein when the third ejection processing is performed, the third ejection processing is performed before the medium is fed between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., see control path in annotated Tamaki’s Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note that the control path configuration/order involving “S106 RECORDING” in Tamaki’s Fig. 9 is modifying the pass printing taught by Sakagami (Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the third ejection processing (thereby increasing the humidity of the internal printing environment) before performing recording (i.e., an order taught by Tamaki), because this creates an optimal humidity within the printer in which the recording can occur (i.e., “appropriately humidifying ejection openings” in order to maintain proper viscosity of the ink in those openings; Tamaki: ¶0007 & ¶0059).
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakagami in view of Tamaki and further in view of Matsuo (US 20220234351 A1).
With respect to Claim 5, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, which includes the following elements:
Wherein the control unit (i.e., a “control unit 31” which “includes a CPU 32…that performs various kinds of controls and operation processing” in tandem with driving circuits such as “35”, “36”, “45”, “39”, etc.; Sakagami: ¶0049, ¶0059, & Fig. 6) performs the third ejection control (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, the third ejection control is causing the liquid ejection unit (i.e., “ink jet heads 11; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1) to act as a humidifier of the environment.
Support portion & medium (i.e., “transport belt 1” supporting “print medium 2”; Sakagami: ¶0045, ¶0048, & Fig. 1)
Sakagami is silent on wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control by using a time from when recorded data is received to when a leading end of a medium first fed reaches between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit.
Matsuo teaches wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control by using a time from when recorded data is received to when a leading end of a medium first fed reaches between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., conducting a maintenance process during “period Ta6” by receiving print data in the preceding “period Ta5” and ending the maintenance process to then execute the printing process by forming an image onto the recording paper; Matsuo: ¶0150-0151 & Fig. 15). In other words, this maintenance process “Ta6” initiates from receiving recorded data and ends when the medium is fed into the recording region whereupon recording occurs (which occurs between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit as taught by Sakagami in ¶0048 & Fig. 1). Moreover, Sakagami in view of Tamaki has already taught that the third ejection control (Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059) is used in a maintenance capacity, humidifying the printer nozzles to maintain proper viscosity of the ink (Tamaki: ¶0007 & 0059), which decreases the risk of clogging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the third ejection control as taught by Sakagami (thereby increasing the humidity of the internal printing environment) by using a time from when recorded data is received to when a leading end of a medium first fed reaches between the support portion and the liquid ejecting unit (i.e., an order taught by Matsuo), because this maintains the printer for optimal performance in which the upcoming recording can occur (Matsuo: ¶0150-0151 & Fig. 15, “Ta5”-“Ta7”).
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakagami in view of Tamaki and further in view of Kanome et al. (US 20110273496 A1; herein referred to as “Kanome”).
With respect to Claim 7, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, which include the following elements:
Liquid ejecting unit (i.e., “ink jet heads 11”; Sakagami: ¶0048 & Fig. 1)
Support portion (i.e., “transport belt 1” supporting “print medium 2”; Sakagami: ¶0045, ¶0048, & Fig. 1)
Control unit (i.e., a “control unit 31” which “includes a CPU 32…that performs various kinds of controls and operation processing” in tandem with driving circuits such as “35”, “36”, “45”, “39”, etc.; Sakagami: ¶0049, ¶0059, & Fig. 6)
Third ejection control (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, the third ejection control is causing the liquid ejection unit to act as a humidifier of the environment.
First ejection control (i.e., “printing” in which “the ink droplets are discharged from the ink jet head” onto a print medium; Sakagami: ¶0059 & ¶0010)
Sakagami is silent on wherein
an interval between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion is adjustable under control of the control unit, and
the control unit sets the interval when performing the third ejection control to be larger than the interval when performing the first ejection control.
Kanome teaches
an interval between the liquid ejecting unit and the support portion (i.e., “gap” between “recording head units 1” and “sheet conveying unit 2”; Kanome: ¶0020-0021 & Fig. 1) is adjustable under control of the control unit (i.e., “control unit 15” adjusting the device to switch between a “first gap” and a “second gap”; Kanome: 0025-0026 & 0028-0032), and
the control unit sets the interval when performing the third ejection control to be larger than the interval when performing the first ejection control (i.e., “control unit 15” varying gap from a “humidifying position” called “first gap” in “step S103” to a “recording position” called “second gap” in “step S106”, wherein the humidifying position’s gap is larger than the recording position’s gap; Kanome: ¶0009, ¶0026-0032, & Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the control unit to set/adjust an interval as claimed because increasing the gap during humidification controls increases the speed in which humidity can be adjusted within the device (Kanome: ¶0031).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakagami in view of Tamaki and further in view of Hara & Hayakawa (US 6481826 B1; herein referred to as “Hara”).
With respect to Claim 10, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, wherein
the liquid ejecting unit is configured to eject a plurality of colors of liquid from different nozzles of the plurality of nozzles (i.e., multiple colors including yellow, cyan, and magenta used in liquid ejecting unit “ink jet heads”; Sakagami: ¶0048), and
the control unit performs the third ejection control by using a liquid (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059).
Also note that Sakagami teaches “cleaning units 13” which include “a cap capable of covering a nozzle surface of the inkjet head 11”, wherein these caps are located between the support portion “1” and the liquid ejecting unit “11” when the caps are moved up to the nozzles (Sakagami: ¶0050).
Sakagami is silent on
the control unit performs the third ejection control by using a color of liquid having a largest moisture amount among the plurality of colors of liquid.
Hara teaches the control unit performs the third ejection control by using a color of liquid having a largest moisture amount among the plurality of colors of liquid (i.e., “ink having a comparatively large water content jetted from the recording head 12 is held by the liquid retainer 58, so that the water content in the ink maintains the internal space of the capping unit 9 at high humidity”; Hara: col. 24 l. 1-9). Hara’s “liquid retainer 58”, which contains comparatively large water content ink, teach that the caps within Sakagami’s “cleaning units 13” can be used to humidify the interior of a liquid ejecting device when Sakagami’s “control unit 31” performs third ejection control with the device’s ink with the largest moisture amount.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enhance the caps within Sakagami’s “cleaning units 13” using the teachings of Hara’s “liquid retainer 58”, which contains comparatively large water content liquid. This enhancement enables the caps within Sakagami to be used to humidify the interior of a liquid ejection device and “therefore the degree to an increase in viscosity of ink or hardening of ink in nozzle orifices can be decreased efficiently” (Hara: col. 24, 1-9).
With respect to Claim 11, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, wherein
the liquid ejecting unit is configured to eject a plurality of colors of liquid including yellow from different nozzles of the plurality of nozzles (i.e., multiple colors including yellow, cyan, and magenta ; Sakagami: ¶0048)
Sakagami is silent on the control unit performs the third ejection control by using the yellow liquid among the plurality of colors of liquid.
Hara teaches the control unit performs the third ejection control by using the yellow liquid among the plurality of colors of liquid (i.e., “ink having a comparatively large water content jetted from the recording head 12 is held by the liquid retainer 58, so that the water content in the ink maintains the internal space of the capping unit 9 at high humidity” wherein yellow is the colored ink with highest water content; Hara: col. 24 l. 1-9, col. 1 l. 30-34, col. 17 Table 1 [see table column “Y” compared to columns “M" and “C”]). Hara’s “liquid retainer 58”, which contains comparatively large water content ink (the yellow “Y” ink shown in Table 1 as containing higher water content than the other colors magenta “M” and cyan “C”; Hara: col. 24 l. 1-9, col. 1 l. 30-34, col. 17 Table 1), teach that the caps within Sakagami’s “cleaning units 13” can be used to humidify the interior of a liquid ejecting device when Sakagami’s “control unit 31” performs third ejection control with the device’s ink with the largest moisture amount (i.e., the yellow ink described in Hara Table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enhance the caps within Sakagami’s “cleaning units 13” using the teachings of Hara’s “liquid retainer 58”, which contains comparatively large water content liquid (i.e., yellow ink “Y” shown in Hara’s Table 1). This enhancement enables the caps within Sakagami to be used to humidify the interior of a liquid ejection device and “therefore the degree to an increase in viscosity of ink or hardening of ink in nozzle orifices can be decreased efficiently” (Hara: col. 24, 1-9).
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakagami in view of Tamaki and further in view of Levy et al. (US 20200254761 A1; herein referred to as “Levy”).
With respect to Claim 12, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1, wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control (i.e., “control unit 31” controls the circuits [e.g., “ink jet head driving circuit 35”, “print medium detection circuit 45”, etc.; see Sakagami Fig. 6] to enable the device to conduct “printing, cleaning…moisture adjustment of print medium, and the like…” with Sakagami teaching that the liquid ejection unit can generate “mist of ink discharged from an ink jet head" which can stain the support portion “1”; Sakagami: ¶0045 & ¶0058-0059). In other words, the third ejection control is causing the liquid ejection unit to act as a humidifier of the environment.
Sakagami is silent on wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control by using the nozzle having a long non-ejection period among the plurality of nozzles.
Levy teaches wherein the control unit performs the third ejection control by using the nozzle having a long non-ejection period among the plurality of nozzles (i.e., “a controller can be incorporated into, or be operatively connected to, the moisture sensor and/or the humidifier, and the controller can be adapted to control the humidifier to…supply the mist to the sealed space only after an idle time period (during which the nozzles do not eject the liquid ink) has expired, etc.”; Levy: ¶0006-0007 & 0033). In other words, Levy teaches that a control unit can “be adapted” to perform the third ejection control, the action of humidifying the interior of the device, using factors including the length of time in which a nozzle has been idle when controlling the action of humidifying.
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 control unit taught in Sakagami to use the fact of a nozzle have a long period of idleness to initiate the action of third ejection control, because idle nozzles in dry environments are more susceptible to clogging and humidifying the environment decreases that risk.
Allowable Subject Matter
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 are statements of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for each claim:
With respect to Claim 3, Sakagami modified by Tamaki teaches the liquid ejecting device (i.e., “ink jet printer”; Sakagami: Abstract) according to claim 1.
However Sakagami in combination with the other prior art of record does not reasonably teach or suggest the features of the liquid ejecting device according to Claim 1, wherein
the control unit is configured to switch between
liquid ejection for achieving a first quality and
liquid ejection for achieving a second quality higher in definition than the first quality, and further,
the control unit does not perform the third ejection control when achieving the first quality, and performs the third ejection control when achieving the second quality.
It is these limitations, expressed in the claimed 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 SHLOMIT CHELST whose telephone number is (571)272-0832. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 8:30 am to 5:00 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, Ricardo Magallanes, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-5960. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/SHLOMIT CHELST/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/ Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights