DETAILED ACTION
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, 2, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishi et al in view of Ishikawa (US Pat No 9,592,975).
Regarding claim 1, Ishi discloses a sheet conveying apparatus comprising:
a first roller (101) that is rotatably supported on a body frame (e.g. lower guide 107) of an apparatus body;
a second roller (102) that is disposed so as to face the first roller to constitute a pair of conveying rollers;
a bush member (105) that is supported on the body frame so as to be movable along a radial direction of the first roller, the bush member rotatably supporting the second roller;
an urging member (106) that urges the bush member in such a direction that the second roller approaches the first roller; and
a conveyance guide member (108) that guides a sheet that is conveyed to a nip portion in the pair of the conveying rollers,
wherein the conveyance guide member is fitted to a rotation shaft of the second roller, the conveyance guide member being movable between a guiding position in which the conveyance guide member guides the sheet, and a retracted position in which the conveyance guide member is retracted from the guiding position, the conveyance guide member contacting, in the retracted position, the body frame so as to move the bush member against an urging force of the urging member in such a direction that the second roller separates from the first roller (e.g. as shown in figures 18-21 and described in the background).
It is noted that Ishi fails to disclose a cover that is openable or closable. However, Ishikawa discloses a similar conveyance device including a cover (32) which is openable and closable relative to the conveyance device, Further, Ishikawa discloses that the cover interacts with the rollers/guides such that from an open to closed position, the cover causes the guides to be placed back into a functional position. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Ishi with the teachings of Ishikawa such that a cover is provide to enable easy access through the shell of the overall apparatus to the location of the jam.
Regarding claim 2, Ishi discloses the conveyance guide member has a pair of bearing portions (109) that are rotatably fitted one to each end of the rotation shaft of the second roller, the bearing portions are shaped as an eccentric cam having in an outer circumferential part thereof a small diameter portion and a large diameter portion, and in the guiding position, the small diameter portion comes close to the body frame to make the second roller contact the first roller under the urging force of the urging member, and in the retracted position, the large diameter portion contacts the body frame to make the second roller separate from the first roller against the urging force of the urging member (as shown in figures 18-21 and described in the background).
Regarding claim 4, Ishi discloses lifting up the sheet nipped in the nip portion in the pair of the conveying rollers lets the conveyance guide member move from the guiding position to the retracted position so that the second roller separates from the first roller (e.g. the prior art is capable of being moved if the sheet is lifted against the spring force of 106).
Regarding claim 5, it is noted that Ishi is silent to the type of apparatus the conveyance device is used. However, Ishikawa discloses a similar conveyance apparatus for forming images on sheet with an image forming unit (6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Ishi with the teachings of Ishikawa to achieve the predictable result of printing on the sheets as they are conveyed, while allowing removal of jammed sheets.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to the applicant’s argument that the combination fails to disclose the claimed features of amended claim 1; As noted in the previous rejection (current claim 1 is a combination of claim 1 and former claim 3), claim 3 was obvious in view of Ishi and Ishikawa. The applicant’s remark makes note that 32 is a guide, however the mechanism of the overall structure disclosed by Ishikawa includes a roller attachment device wherein the roller pairs are separated from one another when the cover opens (shown in figure 11) which actuates arm 61 then presses rollers RA of PP2 together. As such the combination suggests the overall claimed invention.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Patrick Cicchino whose telephone number is (571)270-1954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM to 5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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.
/Patrick Cicchino/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights