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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka US 2022/0239802 in view of Kominato US 6,473,591 and McCuen US 2011/0139851.
Regarding claim 1: Tanaka teaches an image forming device (fig. 1, fig. 3, fig. 4) comprising: an image scanner (image reading section 13, paragraph 0019); a printer (image forming section 14, paragraph 0019) provided below the image scanner (fig. 1, 14 is below 13); a sheet discharge tray (discharge tray 16, paragraph 0019) provided between the image scanner and the printer (fig. 1, 16 is between 13 and 14) and forming, between the sheet discharge tray and the image scanner, a sheet discharge space into which a sheet printed by the printer is discharged (discharge tray of fig. 1 is having a space for holding discharged paper, fig. 1); and an operation panel (operation panel 12a, paragraph 0028, also see fig,. 1) attached on a front side (paragraph 0028, operation panel 12a…a front portion of the image reading section 13) of the image scanner (12a is attached to 13, fig. 1), a frame provided surrounding the operation unit (see the dark portion on the top of 12a, fig. 1), and a light emitter (sub light emitting section 31, paragraph 0028) including a lamp that makes a predetermined notification to the user (paragraph 0028, indication of states of the image forming apparatus 10), and the light emitter is at a lower portion of the frame (fig. 1, paragraph 28, emits light in a lower portion of the operation panel 12a, fig. 1, note: obviously, the best position to emit light in the lower section of 12a is to located from a lower portion of the frame of 12a) at a position away from the sheet discharge space (paragraph 0028, disposed at a position readily viewable by the user, note: if the light is to be viewable by the user operating from the front, obviously the light will be designed such that it will reach the user in a position away from the sheet discharge space in a front view of the image forming device) in a front view of the image forming device.
Although it may be inherent/obvious that the operation panel includes an operation unit operated by a user, Tanaka does not clearly state that.
Kominato teaches operation panel includes an operation unit operated by a user (column 5, lines 30-35, the user supplies a print-out command to the printer 2 either by pressing a print start button…column 5, lines 10-15, control panel 11 for operating the image forming apparatus).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka to include: the operation panel includes an operation unit operated by a user.
The reason of doing so would have allow users to be able to use/control the image forming apparatus.
Tanaka as modified still does not teach the light emitter protrudes from a lower portion of the frame.
McCuen teaches the light emitter protrudes from a frame, (123, fig. 3, paragraph 0058, output 123 are raised and protrude in relation to the housing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka to include: the light emitter protrudes from a frame of operating panel 12a.
The reason of doing so would have allowed better visibility of the output, (paragraph 58, McCuen).
Note: after modifying Tanaka with McCuen, the light emitter protrudes from a lower portion of the frame at a position away from the sheet discharge space in a front view of the image forming device.
Regarding claim 2: Tanaka teaches the image forming device according to claim 1,
Tanaka does not teach wherein a part of a lower portion of the operation panel is provided at a position overlapping with the sheet discharge space in the front view.
Kominato teaches the operation panel is located to the left side of the image forming apparatus in the front view (control panel 11 for operating the image forming apparatus, column 5, lines 10-15, fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka to include: the operation panel is located to the left side of the image forming apparatus in the front view.
The reason of doing so would have provided more convenient for the left-hand person. It would also have been an obvious design choice of where to put the operation panel.
Note: see fig. 1 of Tanaka, when the operation panel 12a is on the left side, a part of a lower portion of the operation panel is provided at a position overlapping with the sheet discharge space 16/17 in the front view.
Regarding claim 3: Tanaka teaches the image forming device according to claim 1,
Tanaka does not teach wherein the printer includes a door that opens to a front side of the image forming device.
Kominato teaches wherein the printer includes a door that opens to a front side of the image forming device (20, fig. 3, column 5, lines 50-55, a front door 20 is provided at the front of the printer 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka to include: teach wherein the printer includes a door that opens to a front side of the image forming device.
The reason of doing so would have allowed maintenance of the image forming device and sheet feeder unit (column 5, lines 54-56, Kominato).
Note: after the modification, Tanaka, will have a similar structure of fig. 3 of the present invention (door opening and closing at the front, the light emitter below operating panel at the front). Therefore, the light emitter protrudes from the lower portion of the frame at a position away from an opening and closing path of the door in the front view after the modification. Furthermore, paragraph 0024, applicant’s specification, states: As illustrated in FIG. 3, the light emitter 53 protrudes from the lower portion 52L of the frame 52 at a position away from the opening and closing path of the door 31, in other words, the movement locus of the door 31 in a front view of the image forming device 100. Thus, it is possible to provide the lamp 53L for notification to improve the visibility of the sheet discharge space S while preventing the light emitter 53 from obstructing the opening and closing of the door 31 of the printer 30 by a user. Therefore, the meaning of “at a position away from the opening and closing path of the door” is being interpreted as the light emitter is protruded from the lower portion of the frame and that the light emitter is not obstructing the opening and closing of the door.
Regarding claim 5: Tanaka teaches the image forming device according to claim 1, wherein the light emitter protrudes from the lower portion of the frame at a position on a left side of the operation panel in the front view (note: placing the light emitter to the left side of the operation panel is obvious design choice as there are no more than right left and middle of the operation panel view from the front (also see paragraph 28, Tanaka, emit light in a lower portion of the operation panel 12a, …disposed at a position readily viewable by the user).
Tanaka does not teach the operation panel is provided at a position offset to a left side in the front view.
Kominato teaches the operation panel is located to the left side of the image forming apparatus in the front view (control panel 11 for operating the image forming apparatus, column 5, lines 10-15, fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka to include: the operation panel is provided at a position offset to a left side in the front view.
The reason of doing so would have provided more convenient for the left-hand person. It would also have been an obvious design choice of where to put the operation panel.
Regarding claim 6: Tanaka teaches the image forming device according to claim 1, wherein the operation panel is provided at a position offset to a right side in the front view (12a, fig. 1), and the light emitter protrudes from the lower portion of the frame at a position on a right side of the operation panel in the front view (note: placing the light emitter to the right side of the operation panel is obvious design choice as there are no more than right left and middle of the operation panel view from the front (also see paragraph 28, Tanaka, emit light in a lower portion of the operation panel 12a, …disposed at a position readily viewable by the user).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KING Y POON whose telephone number is (571)270-0728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Alexander Beck can be reached at 571-272-3750. 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.
/KING Y POON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights