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 has been received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS’s) submitted on 16 January 2025 and 14 July 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statements have been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line one appears to include a typographical error based on an the original international filing. Examiner understands the claim to read:
13. The control system according to claim 1,
wherein the object is a sheet.
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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the Examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the Examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi et al. (US 2003/0111218 A1) in view of FORT FILGUEIRA et al. (US 2019/0061377 A1).
As related to independent claim 1, Iguchi et al. teaches a control system for facility equipment (Iguchi et al.- Page 1, Paragraphs 2 & 4-6 and Figures 5 & 6, shown below) comprising: an image forming apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 2 and Figure 3, shown below). Iguchi et al. does not specifically teach the image forming apparatus is a liquid discharge apparatus. However, FORT FILGUEIRA et al. teaches a control system for facility equipment (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Figure 1, shown below), and specifically teaches comprising: a liquid applying apparatus (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Figure 1, Reference #100, shown below) including: a liquid applying device to apply liquid to an object (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Figure 1, Reference #102, shown below); and a heating device to heat the object on which the liquid has been applied (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraph 21 and Figure 1, Reference #118, shown below); an exhaust device to exhaust air inside a space in which the liquid applying apparatus is placed (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraph 19 and Figure 1, Reference #108, #124, #110, & #112, shown below); an air conditioner [i.e. heat exchanger] to adjust air environment inside the space (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraph 19 and Figure 1, Reference #106 & #101, shown below); and processing circuitry [i.e. controller] to control the exhaust device and the air conditioner according to a state of the liquid applying apparatus (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraphs 17-18; Page 4, Paragraph 39; and Figure 1, Reference #114, shown below). 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 system of Iguchi et al. to be used with a liquid applying apparatus of FORT FILGUEIRA et al. in an effort to provide a control system which monitors and controls the operational environment within parameters of the printing device, providing optimal adjustment of the ambient temperature and/or humidity (FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 9-11 and Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
382
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
370
426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
632
398
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
350
390
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As related to independent claim 14, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains for the reasons indicated above and continues to teach a control method for facility equipment, comprising: controlling an exhaust device to exhaust air inside a space in which a liquid applying apparatus to apply liquid to an object is placed, and an air conditioner to adjust air environment inside the space according to a state of the liquid applying apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2-6 & 9-10 and Figure 6, shown above and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraphs 17-19 and Page 4, Paragraph 39).
As related to dependent claim 2, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the air conditioner includes an air supplier to supply air to an inside of the space, and wherein the processing circuitry controls the exhaust device and the air supplier according to a state of the liquid applying apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 2, Paragraph 28 and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 26; Page 4, Paragraph 39; and Figure 1, Reference #106, shown above).
As related to further dependent claim 3, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach a plurality of liquid applying apparatuses [i.e. copy machines or printers or a combination of a plurality of devices which contribute to ambient temperature and humidity of the environment] including the liquid applying apparatus, wherein the processing circuitry calculates an exhaust amount and an air supply amount according to a state of the liquid applying apparatus for each of the plurality of liquid applying apparatuses, and controls the exhaust device and the air supplier based on a total of calculated exhausted amounts and a total of calculated air supply amounts (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 3 & Figures 2, 6, & 7 and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 1 & 9-10).
PNG
media_image5.png
278
644
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
634
316
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As related to further dependent claim 4, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the air conditioner includes: the air supplier; a heater to heat air to be supplied; a humidifier to humidify air to be supplied; and a dehumidifier to dehumidify air to be supplied, and wherein the processing circuitry controls the exhaust device, the air supplier, and at least one of the heater, the humidifier, and the dehumidifier according to a state of the liquid applying apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2-11; Page 2, Paragraphs 12 & 27-28; Page 3, Paragraph 42 – Page 4, Paragraph 46 and Figures 5 & 7, shown above).
As related to dependent claim 5, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the state of the liquid applying apparatus includes information about an operation state and a non-operation state of the liquid applying apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 2, Paragraphs 12-13 and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 33).
As related to dependent claim 6, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the state of the liquid applying apparatus includes a liquid application condition [i.e. liquid evaporated by the dryer] that is used when liquid is applied to the object (FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 39).
As related to further dependent claim 7, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the liquid application condition includes at least one of an amount of liquid to be applied to the object, a conveyance speed [i.e. printing speed] of the object when the object is conveyed by the liquid applying apparatus, a type of the object [i.e. deformable or not], and a thickness of the object (FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 13; Page 2, Paragraph 21; and Page 3, Paragraphs 29-30 & 39).
As related to dependent claim 8, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the state of the liquid applying apparatus includes humidity inside the liquid applying apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 2, Paragraph 14 & Page 4, Paragraph 46 and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 3, Paragraph 39).
As related to dependent claim 9, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the processing circuitry controls the exhaust device and the air conditioner based on environment information about the space in addition to the state of the liquid applying apparatus (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2-10 & Page 4, Paragraphs 46-47 and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraphs 23-25 & Page 3, Paragraph 39).
As related to further dependent claim 10, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the environment information includes at least one of human detection information, a carbon dioxide density, a temperature, and a humidity (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2-10 & Page 4, Paragraphs 46-47 and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraphs 23-25 & Page 3, Paragraph 39).
As related to dependent claim 11, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the processing circuitry changes an operation level of each of the exhaust device and the air conditioner to at least two stages [i.e. fully, or partially, restrict the flow] or more to control an exhaust amount and an air supply amount (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2-10; Page 2, Paragraphs 12-14 & 27-28; Page 4, Paragraphs 46-47; & Figures 5-7, shown above and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 2, Paragraphs 23-26).
As related to dependent claim 12, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the liquid applying apparatus is an image forming apparatus to apply liquid to the object [i.e. medium, paper, target] to form an image (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 5 and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2 & 12).
As related to dependent claim 13, the combination of Iguchi et al. and FORT FILGUEIRA et al. remains as applied above and continues to teach the object is a sheet [i.e. medium, paper, media] (Iguchi et al. – Page 1, Paragraph 5 and FILGUEIRA et al. – Page 1, Paragraphs 2, 12, & 14 & Figure 1, Reference #120, shown above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Obu et al. (US 5,39,058 A) teaches a recording apparatus with heaters and coolers and exhaust fans. Wotton et al. (US 2002/0071016 A1) teaches a liquid applying recording apparatus with heaters and coolers and controls to adjust humidity. IKOSHI (US 2012/0026264 A1) teaches an ink applying image forming apparatus with heating and cooling. Nishitani et al. (US 2016/0375680 A1) teaches an ink jet recording apparatus with heating and cooling units, controlling humidity, blowers, fans and dryer units. SEKI et al. (US 2017/0015122 A1) teaches an inkjet printing apparatus with heaters and coolers. SEGUCHI et al. (US 2021/0129567 A1) teaches an ink jet recording apparatus with heating and cooling units. Popplewell et al. (US 12,030326 B2) teaches a printing unit with heating units and dryers.
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular Figures & Reference Numbers, Columns, Paragraphs and Line Numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JOHN P ZIMMERMANN whose telephone number is (571)270-3049. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1730 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached at (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 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.
/John P Zimmermann/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights