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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 7 February 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1), which requires the following: (1) a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office; (2) U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications listed in a section separately from citations of other documents; (3) the application number of the application in which the information disclosure statement is being submitted on each page of the list; (4) a column that provides a blank space next to each document to be considered, for the examiner’s initials; and (5) a heading that clearly indicates that the list is an information disclosure statement. The information disclosure statement has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as the form appears to have no information therein.
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) is/are:
“a first holder” in claim 1;
and “a second holder” in claim 2.
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 § 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 9 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 9 recites the limitation "the second holder" in lines 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544).
Regarding claim 1, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge (fig.3&9, #1) comprising: a housing (fig.3, #10) configured to accommodate developer therein (para.0038); a developing roller (fig.3, #30) rotatable about a developing roller axis extending in a first direction (fig3, #32); a storage medium (fig.3&5, #61; para.0071) including an electrical contact surface (fig.5, #611) facing in a second direction crossing the first direction (fig.3&6, see direction of #611 vs. second direction and first direction); and a first holder holding the electrical contact surface (fig.5&6, #71 holding #61/#611), the first holder being positioned at one end portion of the housing in the first direction (see fig.3, at one end in “first direction”), wherein the first holder has a first through hole penetrating the first holder in the second direction (fig.3&5, #620penetrating #71 in the second direction), and wherein the first through hole is aligned with the electrical contact surface in the second direction in a state where the first holder holds the electrical contact surface (fig.5, when #61 installed in #620, the two are aligned in the second direction).
Regarding claim 2, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge further comprising: a second holder positioned spaced away from the first holder in the second direction (fig.5&6, #72 spaced in “second direction”); and an elastic member positioned between the first holder and the second holder in the second direction (fig.5&6, #73), the elastic member being expandable and shrinkable in the second direction (fig.6, see solid representation and ghost representation).
Regarding claim 4, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge wherein the first through hole is aligned with the storage medium in the second direction (fig.5, when #61 installed in #620, the two are aligned in the second direction).
Regarding claim 7, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge wherein the first holder further has a second through hole penetrating the first holder in the second direction (fig.5&6, portion of #71 in which #73 exists), and wherein the second through hole is aligned with the electrical contact surface in the second direction (see fig.6).
Regarding claim 8, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge wherein an inner dimension of the first through hole is larger than an inner dimension of the second through hole (see fig.6, diameter of hole with #73 vs. diameter of hole with #611).
Regarding claim 9, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge wherein a portion of the first holder is positioned farther from the second holder in the second direction than the electrical contact surface is from the second holder in the second direction (see annotated fig.6, below, distance A vs. distance B).
Annotated Fig.6:
PNG
media_image1.png
570
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2017/0269544) teach a cartridge wherein the first holder includes a recessed outer surface that holds the electrical contact surface in a state where the electrical contact surface is inserted in the recessed outer surface (fig.6, see hole/recess holding #611).
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961).
Regarding claim 1, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge (fig.3, #1) comprising: a housing (fig.3, #10/#50) configured to accommodate developer therein (para.0023); a developing roller rotatable about a developing roller axis extending in a first direction (fig.2&3, #20 when #1 is in #50); a storage medium (fig.3&6, #70; para.0046) including an electrical contact surface facing in a second direction crossing the first direction (fig.3&6, #71 (fig.4, #71 faces in second direction); and a first holder holding the electrical contact surface (fig.6&7, #81 holding #70/#71), the first holder being positioned at one end portion of the housing in the first direction (fig.3, #81/#80 at one end in first direction), wherein the first holder has a first through hole penetrating the first holder in the second direction (fig.7, unlabeled hole in #80 at back side of #70), and wherein the first through hole is aligned with the electrical contact surface in the second direction in a state where the first holder holds the electrical contact surface (fig.7, when #70 aligned with unlabeled hole in #80 in the second direction).
Regarding claim 2, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge further comprising: a second holder positioned spaced away from the first holder in the second direction (fig.6&7, projection on #50 supporting #90 spaced in “second direction”); and an elastic member positioned between the first holder and the second holder in the second direction (fig.6&7, #90), the elastic member being expandable and shrinkable in the second direction (para.0049).
Regarding claim 3, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein the second holder and the elastic member are positioned between the first through hole and the housing in the first direction (fig.6&7, unlabeled hole in #80 farther in first direction than support post on #50).
Regarding claim 4, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein the first through hole is aligned with the storage medium in the second direction (fig.7, when #70 aligned with unlabeled hole in #80 in the second direction).
Regarding claim 5, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge further comprising: an adhesive positioned between the electrical contact surface and the first holder (para.0047; fig.7, likely unlabeled different material layer between #70 and #81).
Regarding claim 6, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein the adhesive is aligned with the electrical contact surface and the first through hole in the second direction (fig.7, likely unlabeled different material layer between #70 and unlabeled hole in #81).
Regarding claim 7, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein the first holder further has a second through hole penetrating the first holder in the second direction (fig.7, the portion of #80 with which #547 interact), and wherein the second through hole is aligned with the electrical contact surface in the second direction (fig.7, at least the edge near #54 is aligned with #71).
Regarding claim 8, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein an inner dimension of the first through hole is larger than an inner dimension of the second through hole (see fig.7, diameter of hole of #80 with which #547 interact vs. diameter of unlabeled hole in #80).
Regarding claim 9, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein a portion of the first holder is positioned farther from the second holder in the second direction than the electrical contact surface is from the second holder in the second direction (see annotated fig.7, below, distance A vs. distance B).
Annotated fig.7:
PNG
media_image2.png
454
500
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) teach a cartridge wherein the first holder includes a recessed outer surface that holds the electrical contact surface in a state where the electrical contact surface is inserted in the recessed outer surface (fig.7, see hole/recess holding #70).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mori et al. (US Pub.2023/0244183) is being cited as related art even though it does not constitute prior art.
Mizutani (US Pub.2018/0284690) is being cited as related art.
Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0397124) is similar to Itabashi et al. (US Pub.2021/0063961) cited above in the rejections.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA K ROTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2154. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30AM-3:30 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached on 571-272-3555. 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.
/LKR/
2/6/2026
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852