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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
At para. 0055, lines 3-4, “a second pressing member configured to press the cap section toward the liquid ejection head”, “cap section” should be replaced with “part of the facing section” as it is understood from the last lines of the paragraph and the following paragraph that the second pressing member (coil spring 54) is not part of or pressing the cap section but presses the part of the facing section (upstream support section 46) instead.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, last two lines, “the limit value in the first drive region is smaller than the limit value in the second drive region”, “the” should be replaced with “a” before each “limit value” as each limit value are different and designated for specific parts, and the previous recitation of “a limit value” is singular.
Further in claim 1, line 9, “a control section that is a control section configured”, “that is a control section” does not provide further detail and should be removed for redundancy.
In claim 2, line 3, “an opening and closing body that is an opening and closing body provided”, “that is an opening and closing body” does not provide further detail and should be removed for redundancy.
In claim 7, lines 5-6, “a second pressing member configured to press the cap section toward the liquid ejection head”, “cap section” should be replaced with “part of the facing section” as it is understood (as mentioned above for para. 0055).
Further in claim 7, last two lines, “pushes down a part of the facing section against the pressing force of the second pressing member”, “a” should be replaced with “the” before “part” and “the” should be replaced with “a” before “pressing force of the second member”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) include: “section” and “unit” in all claims.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano et al. (US 20220097379 A1), hereinafter referred to as Amano, in view of Sasaki et al. (US 20190291438A1), hereinafter referred to as Sasaki.
Regarding claim 1, Amano teaches a recording device (printer 1; at para. 0035; Fig. 1) comprising:
a transport path configured to transport a medium (transport path T with A direction; at para. 0038; Fig. 1);
a recording section configured to move with respect to the transport path in a direction that intersects a recording surface of the medium (head unit 20 moves in B direction intersecting A direction; at para. 0038-0039; Fig. 1);
a facing section disposed facing the recording section with the transport path interposed therebetween (transport unit 10; at para. 0039, 0041; Fig. 1);
a movement unit configured to move the recording section (lifting and lowering mechanism 30; at para. 0043; Fig. 2)
a drive source of the movement unit (motor 41; at para. 0049, 0117; Fig. 2); and
a control section configured to control the drive source (control section 26 is controls
motor 41; at para. 0117, 0118) and that is configured to stop the recording section movement when a pressing force reaches a limit value (positioning of head unit 20 may be limited/stopped when pressing against cam 48 (pressing force against cam and compression/pressing force of spring 29) to reach a recording position or when pressing against the cap 64 (full compression of spring 29, compression of spring 65 for cap pressure, and pressing force of pin 20P against upper end surface 273 of elongated hole 37); at para. 0150-0151; Fig 21, 22) wherein
a movement direction of the recording section when the recording section moves from a position farthest from the facing section (retracted position; at para. 0038; two-dot chain line in Fig. 1; Fig. 20) toward the facing section (recording position; at para. 0038; solid line in Fig. 1; Fig. 20; cap position; Fig. 22) is defined as a first movement direction (B direction; Fig. 1, 21, 22),
a drive region of the recording section includes
a first drive region (movement from retracted position to recording position; at para. 0039, 150; Fig. 1, 20 to 21) and
a second drive region positioned in the first movement direction with respect to the first drive region (movement from recording position to cap position; at para. 0151, Fig. 21 to 22), and
the limit value in the first drive region is smaller than the limit value in the second drive region (partial compression of spring 29 for movement to a recording position holds less pressing force than at least full compression of spring 29 and compression of spring 65 for movement to cap position).
While Amano teaches the movement of the recording section is stopped when reaching a limit value, Amano does not explicitly teach wherein the control section is configured to stop the drive source when drive force of the drive source exceeds a limit value.
Sasaki teaches a recording apparatus (inkjet printing apparatus 1; at para. 0025; Fig. 1) wherein a control section (print controller 202; at para. 0085; Fig. 2) is configured to stop the drive source when drive force of the drive source exceeds a limit value based on detection by a load detecting unit (when the load detecting unit 50 determined the PWM is equal to or larger than a predetermined threshold, the drive motor is stopped; at para. 0086).
Therefore, 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 section as taught by Amano to specifically detect the drive force for the purpose of better determining a positioning/state of a recording section as taught by Sasaki (such as separated or in a firmly-fixed state with relation to a cap member; at para. 0091).
Regarding claim 6, Amano as modified by Sasaki teach the recording device according to claim 1, and Amano further teaches wherein
the recording section is configured with a liquid ejection head that includes a plurality of nozzles for ejecting a liquid along a width direction, which intersects a medium transport direction, and that ejects the liquid from the nozzles without moving in the width direction (at para. 0055, 0056, 0087), and includes
a cap section configured to cover a liquid ejection surface of the liquid ejection head at a position facing the liquid ejection head (cap unit 62 with caps 64; at para. 0086; Fig. 8, 9), the cap section
is configured to displace in a direction advancing and retreating with respect to the liquid ejection head and includes a first pressing member configured to press the cap section toward the liquid ejection head, and when the recording section moves in the first movement direction, the recording section pushes down the cap section against a pressing force of the first pressing member in the second drive region (cap 64 is lowered in the B direction when pressed by head 20H, and spring 65 is compressed; at para. 0151; Fig. 22).
Claim(s) 2 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano as modified by Sasaki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kotaka et al. (US 20160144636 A1), hereinafter referred to as Kotaka.
Regarding claims 2 and 5, Amano as modified by Sasaki teach the recording device according to claim 1, and Amano teaches the device as further comprising:
a housing of the device (housing 2; at para. 0040; Fig. 1) and
a discharge tray provided in the housing, that receives the medium on which recording is performed and discharged, and that is positioned above the recording section (discharge section 3; at para. 0040; includes discharge tray 21 provided above head unit 20; at para. 0045; Fig. 1).
However, Amano as modified by Sasaki does not explicitly teach the discharge tray as an opening and closing body that exposed the recording section by being open.
Kotaka teaches a recording device (recording apparatus 11, 11a; Fig. 4, 26) with a discharge tray provided in the housing (placing table 27 provided at printer unit 12; at para. 0106; Fig. 4) that is above the recording section (recording unit 23; at para. 0085; Fig. 2, 4), and the discharge tray acts as an opening and closing body for exposing the recording section (at para. 0106; Fig. 4).
Therefore, 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 discharge tray as taught by Amano such that it is an opening and closing body that exposes the recording section when open for the purpose of providing an access path from the outside via a higher part for maintenance, such as removal of the recording section, as taught by Kotaka (at para. 0116-0118; Fig. 8).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Shinagawa et al. (US 20150130870 A1), hereinafter referred to as Shinagawa.
Regarding claims 3, Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka teach the recording device according to claim 2, however Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka does not teach wherein when a jam of the medium in the transport path is detected, the control section moves the recording section in a second movement direction opposite from the first movement direction and widens a gap between the recording section and the facing section.
Shinagawa teaches a recording device (serial printer 1; at para. 0043; Fig. 1) wherein when a jam of the medium in the transport path is detected, a control section (control system with control unit 61; includes lift motor 53, paper jam detector 71, 72, and retraction control unit 73, 74; at para. 0083; Fig. 6) moves the recording section in a second movement direction opposite (up) from the first movement direction (down) and widens a gap between a recording section and a facing section (first printhead retraction control unit 73 drives lift motor 53 to move the printhead 12 from head reference position 12D to head-up position 12U away from horizontal conveyance path portion 13c; at para. 0095-0096; Fig. 7A, 7B).
Therefore, 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 section as taught by Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka to further respond to a jam by raising the recording section away from the facing section for the purpose of preventing further contact between the recording section and medium during the jam, preventing further compression of the medium, and making it easier to remove the medium as taught by Shinagawa (at para. 0030-0031).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hamada (US 20210347181 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka teach the recording device according to claim 2, however Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka does not teach the recording device as further comprising: an opening and closing detection section configured to detect an opening and closing state of the opening and closing body, wherein when the control section detects, based on detection information of the opening and closing detection section, that the opening and closing body is closed in a state where the recording section is in the first drive region, then the control section moves the recording section in the first movement direction.
Hamada teaches a recording device (printing apparatus 100; at para. 0022; Fig. 1A-1C) comprising an opening and closing detection section configured to detect an opening and closing state of the opening and closing body (“The sensor control circuit 20 detects the opened or closed state of the cover 3 by use of the cover sensor 21 and notifies the CPU 9 of the opened or closed state of the cover 3”; at para. 0029; Fig. 3, 4), wherein
when the control section detects, based on detection information of the opening and closing detection section, that the opening and closing body is closed (S409; at para. 0038; Fig. 4) in a state where the recording section is in a first drive region (area of tank replacement position in Fig. 1B to home/standby/initial position in Fig. 1C; at para. 0022), then the control section moves the recording section in the first movement direction (print head, from tank replacement position (S407), is returned to home/standby/initial position by CPU9 (S410) if the cover is detected as closed (S409, yes); at para. 0036, 0038, 0039; Fig. 4).
Therefore, 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 recording device as taught by Amano as modified by Sasaki and Kotaka to further include an opening and closing detection section for the purpose of changing the recording section to an appropriate position for user required maintenance, such as tank replacement, when the opening and closing body is opened and returning the recording section to its operational/initial position when the user is done with maintenance as taught by Hamada (at para. 0036-0040).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano as modified by Sasaki as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Okawa et al. (US 20250170845 A1), hereinafter referred to as Okawa.
The applied reference has a common applicant with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Regarding claim 7, Amano as modified by Sasaki teach the recording device according to claim 6, however Amano as modified by Sasaki does not teach wherein a part of the facing section
is configured to displace in a direction advancing and retreating with respect to the liquid ejection head and is provided with a second pressing member configured to press the cap section toward the liquid ejection head, and when the recording section moves in the first movement direction, the recording section pushes down a part of the facing section against the pressing force of the second pressing member in the second drive region.
Okawa teaches a recording device according to claim 6 (inkjet printer 1; Fig. 1), wherein a part of the facing section (upstream support section 46; Fig. 5)
is configured to displace in a direction advancing and retreating with respect to the liquid ejection head (at para. 0112, 0113; Fig. 5) and
is provided with a second pressing member configured to press the cap section toward the liquid ejection head (coil spring 54; at para. 0112, 0113; Fig. 5), and
when the recording section moves in the first movement direction, the recording section pushes down a part of the facing section against the pressing force of the second pressing member in the second drive region (third movement region Am3; at para. 0112, 0113, 0142; Fig. 5).
Therefore, 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 recording device as taught by Amano as modified by Sasaki to have a part of the facing section with a second pressing member for the purpose of adding an additional pressing force for raising the recording section as taught by Okawa (at para. 0142).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
The examiner notes that overcoming the rejection of claim 7 as described above would result in only an objection to claim 7. If the rejection were overcome, claim 7 would be 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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amano as modified by Sasaki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoshino et al. (US 20210394537 A1), hereinafter referred to as Yoshino.
Regarding claim 8, Amano as modified by Sasaki teach the recording device according to claim 1, and Amano further teaches wherein a driven roller configured to be driven to rotate in contact with the medium is provided in the transport path (upper roller of roller pair 11 downstream of the head unit 20; Fig. 1), however Amano as modified by Sasaki does not teach wherein the driven roller is supported by a support member, and the support member narrows a frontage when accessing between the recording section and the facing section.
Yoshino teaches a recording device (recording device 11; at para. 0024; Fig. 1), wherein
a driven roller configured to be driven to rotate in contact with the medium is provided in the transport path (discharge driven rollers 44; at para. 0063; Fig. 6, 9A),
the driven roller is supported by a support member (portion of Fig. 5 annotated below), and
the support member narrows a frontage when accessing between a recording section and a facing section (portion of Fig. 5 annotated below).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
712
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, 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 recording device taught by Amano as modified by Sasaki to include a driven roller with a support member wherein the driven roller is part of a set that moves at high speed for the purpose of preventing slipping when a medium received kicking force after separating from earlier rollers as taught by Yoshino (at para. 0123).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Okawa et al. (US 20250170844 A1) is relevant to at least claims 1, 6, and 7. Specifically, Fig. 5 shows a cap portion and a part of a facing portion, each with pressing members for urging toward a recording section movable in an advancing/retreating direction with respect to the facing portion.
This reference has a common applicant with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 using this reference might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYRA M VAN KREUNINGEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9423. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 9:00am-6:00pm and Fri 9:00am-1:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ can be reached at (571) 431-0716. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
23 June 2026
/KYRA MELOR VAN KREUNINGEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights