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 .
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.
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.
Claims 3-4 and 6-7 are 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.
Each of claims 3-4 and 6-7 recites "wherein a length of the electrode included in the first electrode layer" (emphasis added). Because a "plurality of electrodes" had previously been set forth in claim 1, it is not clear whether or not the recitation of "the electrode" is intended to refer to a specific one of the plurality of electrodes. If so, which electrode?
As such, claims 3-4 and 6-7 are rendered indefinite. For examination purposes, “a length of the electrode” will be interpreted as --a length of each of the electrodes--.
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) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 2002/0140918) in view of Ebisawa et al. (US 2009/0225150; “Ebisawa”).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura discloses an image forming apparatus (multifunctional printer) ([0004]) configured to expose a surface of a photosensitive member 6 (Fig. 1) with light to form an electrostatic latent image ([0010, 0018]), and attach toner to the electrostatic latent image to form an image (although toner is not explicitly disclosed, a toner/developing material must be present in order for the latent image to be developed into a printed image; [0021]), the image forming apparatus comprising:
an exposure head 10 configured to expose the surface of the photosensitive member 6 with light to form the electrostatic latent image (Fig. 1 [0050, 0059]) and including a light emitting portion 2 that includes a substrate 3, a first electrode layer 4a (Fig. 2A) including a plurality of electrodes 4/11 (Fig. 2B) that are two-dimensionally arranged in a rotation direction (sub-scan direction) of the photosensitive member and a rotational axis direction (main scan direction) of the photosensitive member and are arranged on the substrate at intervals (e.g., a pitch of 14.1 µm in both the main scan/rotational axis direction and the rotation/sub-scan direction) (Fig. 4 [0050, 0052-0053, 0057]), a light emitting layer 1 stacked on the first electrode 4a layer and configured to emit light when a voltage is applied (Fig. 1 [0050, 0052]), and a second electrode layer 5 arranged on a side opposite to a side where the first electrode layer is arranged with respect to the light emitting layer (Fig. 1 [0050])
a controller H (Fig. 1) configured to control application of a voltage to each of the plurality of electrodes included in the first electrode layer based on image data in such a way that the light emitting layer emits light ([0051-0052, 0056]) and configured to control the voltage applied to each of the plurality of electrodes based on the image data in such a way that one pixel is formed by controlling the voltage applied to the plurality of electrodes arranged at different positions in the rotation direction ([0056-0058]),
wherein the plurality of electrodes are arranged in such a way that a pitch of the plurality of electrodes included in the first electrode layer in the rotation direction is an integer multiple of a resolution of the image formed by the image forming apparatus in the rotation direction, excluding an equal multiple. (See [0056-0057]. A light source for one pixel is made up of 9 electrodes/emission segments 11 in the first electrode layer—3 in the main scan/rotational axis direction multiplied by 3 in the rotation/sub-scan direction—and each line has a resolution of 600 dpi. As such, the pitch of the plurality of electrodes included in the first electrode layer in the rotation/sub-scan direction is 1800 dpi which is an integer multiple of 600 dpi which is the resolution of the image formed by the image forming apparatus in the rotation/main scan direction, excluding an equal multiple.)
Nakamura fails to disclose the second electrode layer 5 through which light is transmissible. The light emitting portion of Nakamura is a bottom emission type utilizing a transparent substrate 3 through which light passes and a metallic second electrode layer 5 (Fig. 1 [0052,0059]).
Ebisawa teaches a similar exposure head 106 (Fig. 2 [0073]) utilizing a bottom emission type light emitting portion 160 (Fig. 5 [0078]). Ebisawa further teaches that a top emission type light emitting portion can replace the bottom emission type light emitting portion (Fig. 8 [0084]). A light emitting portion of the top emission type employs a second electrode layer/counter electrode 178 through which light is transmissible (i.e., it is optically transparent; [0084]).
Based on the teachings of Ebisawa, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to reconfigure the light emitting portion of Nakamura as a top emission type and provide a second electrode layer through which light is transmissible. It has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. In this case, the top emission type light emitting portion would predictably provide light to the photosensitive member.
Regarding claim 2, modified Nakamura teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller controls application of the voltage to the electrodes arranged in parallel in the rotation direction among the plurality of electrodes included in the first electrode layer in such a way that light emission or non-light emission of the light emitting portions arranged in parallel in the rotation direction is simultaneously performed according to image data (Nakamura [0056-0058]).
Regarding claims 3 and 6 as best understood, modified Nakamura teaches the image forming apparatus according to claims 2 and 1, respectively, wherein a length of the electrode included in the first electrode layer in the rotation direction is equal to a length in the rotational axis direction (i.e., square; Nakamura [0053]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Nakamura teaches the image forming apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the light emitting layer is an organic light emitting layer (Nakamura is silent as to the material of the light emitting layer).
Ebisawa teaches utilizing an organic light emitting layer 176 (Fig. 8 [0080, 0084]) in the similar print head.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use an organic light emitting layer, as taught by Ebisawa, in the print head of modified Nakamura, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. In this case, the organic light emitting layer would predictably result in a layer that would emit light in accordance with a current flowing between the first and second electrodes.
Claim(s) 4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 2002/0140918) in view of Ebisawa (US 2009/0225150) as applied to claims 1-2, and further in view of Kobayashi (US 2006/0050134).
Regarding claims 4 and 7 as best understood, modified Nakamura teaches the image forming apparatus according to claims 2 and 1, respectively, but fails to teach wherein a length of the electrode included in the first electrode layer in the rotation direction is longer than a length in the rotational axis direction.
Kobayashi teaches a similar exposure head 101 (Fig. 1 [0044]) used in an image forming apparatus 103 (Fig. 10 [0103]). Kobayashi further teaches shaping light emitting pixels 25b in a rectangular shape that is longer in a rotation direction (i.e., direction orthogonal to an arrangement direction 3L) than in a rotational axis/arrangement direction 3L (see Figs. 7A-7C [0086-0088]).
Based on the teachings of Kobayashi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the plurality of electrodes in the first electrode layer of modified Nakamura such that a length in the rotation direction is longer than a length in the rotational axis direction. One would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the light-emitting area so that a large amount of light can be ensured (Kobayashi [0087]).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is cited as related art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLA J THERRIEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am - 4 pm 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at (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.
/CARLA J THERRIEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852