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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
A terminal disclaimer may be effective to overcome a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection over a pending application (37 CFR 1.321(b) and (c)). A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional, the reply must be complete. MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/PatentForms. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/TerminalDisclaimer.
The terminal disclaimer filed on 8/24/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of application 19/218,071 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant has submitted an amended claim set (dated 8/24/2026) in response to the Examiner Non-final Office Action (dated 6/18/2026). Also note that claims 1, 4, & 5 are currently pending and claims 2 & 3 have been cancelled.
These amendments result in the withdrawal of various objections and rejections stated in that Non-final Office Action, as will be discussed below:
Claims 1-3 Double-patenting Rejections: The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant has filed a terminal disclaimer (see Terminal Disclaimer section). Therefore, the rejections are withdrawn.
Claim 4 Objection: The Examiner agrees with Applicant that the amended language is sufficient to overcome the objection. Therefore, the objection is withdrawn.
Claims 1-4 102 & 103 Rejections: The Examiner acknowledges that the Applicant has sufficiently amended the independent claim 1 to overcome the Tada et al. (US 20040188929 A1) 102 rejection, therefore the 102 rejection of claim 1 is withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection (using a 103 rejection), necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to claim 1, is made in view of Maeyama et al. (US 20190161301 A1) in view of Tada et al. (US 20040188929 A1). Subsequently, this renders Applicant’s remarks regarding the previous rejections to dependent claims 2-4 moot, given the independent claim has a new ground(s) of rejection.
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, 4, & 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al. (US 20190161301 A1; herein referred to as “Maeyama”) further in view of Tada et al. (US 20040188929 A1; herein referred to as “Tada”).
With respect to claim 1, Maeyama teaches an image forming apparatus sheet conveying device (“100”; Maeyama: ¶0061 & Fig. 1) comprising:
a first conveying portion (i.e., “8” and “9”; Maeyama: ¶0069 & Fig. 1) configured to convey a sheet (“P”; Maeyama: Fig. 1);
a correcting portion (“31”) provided on an upstream side of the first conveying portion (i.e., “8” and “9”) in a conveyance direction (i.e., large arrow as shown in Fig. 1) of the sheet (“P”) by the first conveying portion (i.e., “8” and “9”; Maeyama: ¶0069, ¶0084 & Fig. 1-2),
a second conveying portion (“44”) provided on an upstream side of the correcting portion (“31”) in the conveyance direction (i.e., large arrow as shown in Fig. 1; Maeyama: ¶0084 & Fig. 1-2),
an image forming portion (“10”) configured to form an image on the sheet (“P”) conveyed by the first conveying portion (i.e., “8” and “9”; Maeyama: ¶0069 & Fig. 1);
a line sensor (i.e., “CIS 103”, which includes multiple “line sensors”) provided on an upstream side of the image forming portion (i.e., “10”) in the conveyance direction (i.e., arrow direction pointing right to left in Fig. 2) and on a downstream side of the correcting portion (i.e., “31” which function as “a position adjuster”) in the conveyance direction (Maeyama: ¶0083-0084 & Fig. 2);
a first housing (i.e., box of housing “sheet feeding device 1”) that houses the correcting portion (i.e., “31” which function as “a position adjuster”), the second conveying portion (“44”; Maeyama: ¶0083-0084 & Fig. 1-2);
a second housing (i.e., box of housing “image forming device 2”) that is connected to the first housing (i.e., box of housing “sheet feeding device 1”) and houses the first conveying portion (i.e., “8” and “9”; Maeyama: ¶0069 & Fig. 1), the image forming portion (“10”), and the line sensor (“CIS 103”; Maeyama: ¶0069 & Fig. 1-2). Maeyama teaches that “CIS 103 that functions as a third position detector are disposed from an upstream side to a downstream side of the sheet conveying direction of the sheet P” and Fig. 2 indicates the line sensor is near part of the first conveying portion “8” housed in the second housing. Maeyama teaches that “CIS 103” is intended to be near “8” unlike the other CIS stored within the first housing, stating: “By contrast, the third CIS 103 is disposed at the downstream side from the pair of sheet holding rollers 31 and at the upstream side from the transfer cylinder 8” (Maeyama: ¶0084 & Fig. 1-2). Note that the second housing “2” is downstream of “31”, and “8” is contained within the second housing “2”. Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Maeyama teaches “CIS 103” would beneficially be housed in the second housing so as to provide data that is the most timely/relevant as possible (i.e., sensing the orientation of the sheet as close in time as possible to when the sheet is being fed to “8”).
a reading processing portion configured to read (i.e., “controller” when it is running part of “S6” programming “in which the …CIS 103 detect the position of the side edge Pa of the sheet P” and this sheet data is then provided to the controller’s “positional deviation amount calculator” for it to read and process), using the line sensor (“103”), an outer shape of the sheet (i.e., this data is shown in Fig. 7 & 8, including the side outline “Pa” of the sheet) having passed through the correcting portion (“31”; Maeyama: ¶0102, ¶0018-0019, ¶0111, ¶0103, ¶0084, ¶0123 & Fig. 6); In other words, Maeyama teaches that “103” can be used to obtain the “Pa” part of the outer shape of the sheet and that this data from “103” and other sensors is input/read by the “controller 20”, so that it can later run a calculator with the data results that have been read (Maeyama: ¶0084 & ¶0102-0103; Fig. 6 & 16).
an acquisition processing portion (i.e., “positional deviation amount calculator 21”; see Maeyama: ¶0123 & Fig. 6) configured to acquire an inclination angle of the side end of the sheet (i.e., beta angle; see Maeyama Fig. 7-8) having passed through the correcting portion (“31”) with respect to the conveyance direction (i.e., the controller with “positional deviation amount calculator 21” uses sheet data collected from the CISs which are located downstream of the correcting portion “31”, so the sheet “P” has passed through “31” in the conveyance direction [see large arrow] as shown in Fig. 2 prior to reaching “CIS 103”) on a basis of a result of reading by the reading processing portion (i.e., “controller” when it is running part of “S6” programming “in which the …CIS 103 detect the position of the side edge Pa of the sheet P” and this sheet data is then provided to the controller’s “positional deviation amount calculator” for it to read and process). Moreover, note that Maeyama teaches that “103” can be used to acquire the data used to acquire the inclination angle beta shown in Fig. 7-8, by stating “It is to be noted that a method of calculating a positional deviation amount, that is, angular and lateral displacement amounts of a sheet using the first CIS 101 and the second CIS 102 is illustrated in FIG. 7. The method is not limited thereto. For example, a method of calculating angular and lateral displacement amounts of a sheet using the second CIS 102 and the third CIS 103 may also be applied to this disclosure.” (Maeyama: ¶0111, ¶0019, ¶0014, ¶0123 & Fig. 7-8 & 16).
Maeyama is silent on
the correcting portion having an opposed surface that is opposed to a side end of the sheet in a first direction orthogonal to the conveyance direction;
the second conveying portion being configured to convey the sheet in a second direction toward the opposed surface; and
an angle changing portion configured to change an inclination angle of the opposed surface with respect to the conveyance direction.
first housing that houses the correcting portion, the second conveying portion, and the angle changing portion;
and an adjustment processing portion configured to adjust the inclination angle of the opposed surface with respect to the conveyance direction on a basis of a result of acquisition by the acquisition processing portion.
Tada teaches an image forming apparatus sheet conveying device (Tada: Fig. 2) comprising:
the correcting portion having an opposed surface (i.e., “reference face 311” is an opposed surface of the correction portion “310”; Tada: ¶0094; Fig. 3) that is opposed to a side end of the sheet in a first direction orthogonal to the conveyance direction (i.e., “311” opposes a side end of the sheet “S” in a first direction shown by the vertical arrow in Tada’s Fig. 3);
the second conveying portion being configured to convey the sheet in a second direction toward the opposed surface the second conveying portion being configured to convey the sheet in a second direction toward the opposed surface (i.e., “81” conveys sheet “S” in a second direction as shown in Fig. 2 towards the opposed surface as shown in Fig. 3; Tada: ¶0076; Fig. 2-3); and
an angle changing portion (i.e., “first adjusting mechanism 350” including “a swing fulcrum (pivot) 351 on the unit base 342, and a swing operating mechanism 352” as well as “a guide motor 353” and “a transmission system 354”; Tada:¶0100-0101; Fig. 3, see arched arrow by “311”) configured to change an inclination angle of the opposed surface with respect to the conveyance direction (i.e., the “first adjusting mechanism 350” uses the “guide motor 353” to swing the “side guide 310” in an arch as shown in Fig. 3, changing the inclination angle of “311” with respect to the conveyance direction; Tada:¶0094 & 0101-0103; Fig. 3, see arched arrow by “311” and horizontal conveyance direction arrow).
first housing that houses the correcting portion (i.e., “side guide 310”; Tada: ¶0092-0093; Fig. 2-3 & 18A-B), the second conveying portion (i.e., "paired transportation rolls 81” upstream of “310” in the conveyance direction shown by the horizontal arrow in Fig. 3; Tada: ¶0076; Fig. 2-3), and the angle changing portion (i.e., “first adjusting mechanism 350” including “a swing fulcrum (pivot) 351 on the unit base 342, and a swing operating mechanism 352” as well as “a guide motor 353” and “a transmission system 354”; Tada:¶0100-0101; Fig. 3, see arched arrow by “311”). Note that Tada teaches a correcting portion with an angle changing portion that can replace the correcting portion taught by Maeyama, because Tada’s correcting portion performs a function for a similar purpose and is positioned near the same type of parts as Maeyama (e.g., second conveying portion and printheads; see Tada Fig. 2 compared to Maeyama Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that this would result in the correction portion’s angle changing portion being housed within the first housing.
and an adjustment processing portion configured to adjust the inclination angle of the opposed surface with respect to the conveyance direction (i.e., “controlling device 500” configured to adjust “first adjusting mechanism 350”; Tada: ¶0123-0126; Fig. 17, “ST5”-“ST8” & Fig. 3, see arched arrow showing adjustment of “311” and horizontal conveyance direction arrow) on a basis of a result of acquisition by the acquisition processing portion (i.e., “positional deviation amount calculator 21”; see Maeyama: ¶0123 & Fig. 6). In other words, Maeyama structure teaches that a result of acquisition by the acquisition processing portion can be used as the basis for conducting an alignment process (Maeyama: Fig. 16), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the correcting portion “31” taught by Maeyama can be swapped with the correcting portion “side guide 310” taught by Tada to perform the same alignment goal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to swap the correction portion that Maeyama teaches with a correction portion taught by Tada, because Tada’s correction portion has an angle changing portion which provides more precise re-angling of the sheets than the correction portion taught by Maeyama. Moreover, Tada teaches its’ correction portion, and its limitations, as outlined above, are beneficial stating: “The invention has been conducted in order to solve the technical problems. It is an object of the invention to provide a sheet transporting apparatus in which a sheet regulation position can be adjusted easily and correctly by a side position regulating mechanism, and a sheet processing apparatus using such a transporting apparatus. To achieve the object, the invention provides a sheet transporting apparatus, including: a sheet transportation path; a predetermined number of transport members disposed in a sheet transportation path; a side position regulating mechanism which regulates a position of a side edge of a sheet in the sheet transportation path, the side position regulating mechanism having a reference member configured to change a sheet regulation position; a base member on which at least the reference member is mounted; a first adjusting mechanism which adjusts a position of the reference member; and a second adjusting mechanism which adjusts a position of a base member.” (Tada ¶0016-0017).
With respect to claim 4, Maeyama in view of Tada teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquisition processing portion (i.e., “positional deviation amount calculator 21”; see Maeyama: ¶0123 & Fig. 6) is configured to acquire the inclination angle of the side end of the sheet in the first direction (i.e., Beta angle in vertical direction; see Maeyama Fig. 7-8) with respect to the conveyance direction (see large arrow as shown in Maeyama’s Fig. 2) on the basis of the result of the reading by the reading processing portion (i.e., “controller” when it is running part of “S6” programming “in which the …CIS 103 detect the position of the side edge Pa of the sheet P” and this sheet data is then provided to the controller’s “positional deviation amount calculator” for it to read and process; Maeyama: ¶0123, Fig. 16 “S6”, and Fig. 7-8), the sheet (“P”) having passed through the correcting portion (i.e., the acquisition processing portion uses data collected from the CISs which are located downstream of the correcting portion “31”, so the sheet has passed through “31” in the conveyance direction [see large arrow] as shown in Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 5, Maeyama in view of Tada teach the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the reading processing portion (i.e., “controller” when it is running part of “S6” programming “in which the …CIS 103 detect the position of the side edge Pa of the sheet P” and this sheet data is then provided to the controller’s “positional deviation amount calculator” for it to read and process) is configured to read the outer shape of the sheet (i.e., this data is shown in Fig. 7 & 8, including the side outline “Pa” of the sheet) each time a predetermined number (i.e., this predetermined number can be 1 sheet) of the sheets (“P”) are conveyed during execution of an image forming process of forming the image on the sheet (Maeyama: Fig. 1 & 16). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the structure and its process shown in Fig. 16 as well as its conveying to the image forming process (i.e., “10” forming images on sheet “P”) can occur on each sheet. Therefore, Maeyama teaches this can occur at a frequency of the predetermined number of sheets being set to 1.
the acquisition processing portion (i.e., “positional deviation amount calculator 21”; see Maeyama: ¶0123 & Fig. 6) is configured to acquire the inclination angle of the side end of the sheet (i.e., beta angle; see Maeyama Fig. 7-8) having passed through the correcting portion (“31”) with respect to the conveyance direction (i.e., the controller with “positional deviation amount calculator 21” uses sheet data collected from the CISs which are located downstream of the correcting portion “31”, so the sheet “P” has passed through “31” in the conveyance direction [see large arrow] as shown in Fig. 2 prior to reaching “CIS 103”) each time the outer shape of the sheet (i.e., this data is shown in Fig. 7 & 8, including the side outline “Pa” of the sheet) is read by the reading processing portion (i.e., “controller” when it is running part of “S6” programming “in which the …CIS 103 detect the position of the side edge Pa of the sheet P” and this sheet data is then provided to the controller’s “positional deviation amount calculator” for it to read and process; Maeyama: ¶0102, ¶0018-0019, ¶0111, ¶0103, ¶0084, ¶0123, & Fig. 6-16),
Maeyama is silent on
the adjustment processing portion is configured to adjust the inclination angle of the opposed surface with respect to the conveyance direction each time the inclination angle of the side end of the sheet with respect to the conveyance direction is acquired by the acquisition processing portion.
Tada teaches
and the adjustment processing portion is configured to adjust the inclination angle of the opposed surface with respect to the conveyance direction (i.e., “controlling device 500” configured to adjust “first adjusting mechanism 350”; Tada: ¶0123-0126; Fig. 17, “ST5”-“ST8” & Fig. 3, see arched arrow showing adjustment of “311” and horizontal conveyance direction arrow) each time the inclination angle of the side end of the sheet with respect to the conveyance direction(i.e., beta angle; see Maeyama Fig. 7-8) is acquired by the acquisition processing portion (i.e., “positional deviation amount calculator 21”; see Maeyama: ¶0123 & Fig. 6). Note that if the correction portion taught in Maeyama is swapped with the correction portion taught by Tada, the correction portion will contain the adjustment processing portion. As taught by Tada, Tada’s correction portion utilizes its adjustment processing portion for a similar purpose as the correction portion taught by Maeyama to adjust the inclination angle. In other words, similar to Maeyama, Tada teaches the physical elements of its correction portion (i.e., motor 62 that causes “sheet holding rollers 31” to move; Maeyama: ¶0102) are activated as part of performing an adjustment process, however Tada teaches a correction portion with different moveable physical elements. Because Maeyama teaches each time an inclination angle is acquired by the acquisition processing portion it performs an adjustment using its correction portion (and moreover this adjustment occurs by physically moving structural parts of the correction portion), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Maeyama’s alignment method wherein the correction portion is moved (as taught in Fig. 16) can also apply to a modified Maeyama-in-view-of-Tada image forming apparatus sheet conveying device structure (i.e., the Maeyama structure with a swapped correction portion taught by Tada). This would cause the swapped correction portion taught by Tada to perform the alignment method taught by Tada under the same prompting within Maeyama’s method taught by Fig. 16.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to swap the correction portion that Maeyama teaches with a correction portion taught by Tada, because Tada’s correction portion contains an angle changing portion which provides more precise re-angling of the sheets than the angle changing portion taught by Tada. Moreover, Tada teaches its correction portion, and its adjustment processing portion, as outlined above, are beneficial stating: “The invention has been conducted in order to solve the technical problems. It is an object of the invention to provide a sheet transporting apparatus in which a sheet regulation position can be adjusted easily and correctly by a side position regulating mechanism, and a sheet processing apparatus using such a transporting apparatus. To achieve the object, the invention provides a sheet transporting apparatus, including: a sheet transportation path; a predetermined number of transport members disposed in a sheet transportation path; a side position regulating mechanism which regulates a position of a side edge of a sheet in the sheet transportation path, the side position regulating mechanism having a reference member configured to change a sheet regulation position; a base member on which at least the reference member is mounted; a first adjusting mechanism which adjusts a position of the reference member; and a second adjusting mechanism which adjusts a position of a base member.” (Tada: ¶0016-0017).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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