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 .
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 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: heater holding member in claims 1-3; sensor holding member in claims 1, 3; biasing member in claim 1; locking portion in claim 1; engaging portion in claim 1; reinforcing member in claim 3.
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 § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watatani et al. (US 2020/0201218; “Watatani”).
Regarding claim 1, Watatani discloses a fixing device 1 (Fig. 1 [0016]) comprising:
a tubular and rotatable fixing belt 10 (Fig. 3A [0017]);
a heating device 30 that includes a heater 31 configured to heat the fixing belt 10 and faces an inner peripheral surface of the fixing belt 10 (Fig. 3B [0018-0019]); and
a pressurizing member 20 that sandwiches the fixing belt 10 with the heater 31, forms a fixing nip portion N, in which a recording medium S is sandwiched and transported, between the pressurizing member 20 and the fixing belt 10, and causes the fixing belt 10 to be driven and rotated (Fig. 3B [0017, 0042]),
wherein the heating device 30 includes
a heater holding member 32 that holds the heater 31 (Fig. 3B [0022]),
a temperature sensor 33 that faces the heater 31 and is disposed in the heater holding member 32 (Figs. 3B & 4A [0020, 0033]), and
a sensor holding member 34 that is assembled with the heater holding member 32 in which the temperature sensor 33 is disposed in a direction (X direction) in which the sensor holding member 34 faces the temperature sensor 33 (Figs. 4A-4B [0022-0023]),
the sensor holding member 34 includes a biasing member 35 that faces the heater holding member 32 via the temperature sensor 33 and biases the temperature sensor 33 in a direction D1 directed from the temperature sensor 33 to the heater 31 (Figs. 4B & 5B [0021]), and
the heater holding member 32 includes
a locking portion 32A that locks one end 34A of the sensor holding member 34 (Fig. 5B [0023]), and
an engaged portion 32B that is engaged with an engaging portion 34B provided in the sensor holding member 34 at a position different from a position of the one end 34A of the sensor holding member 34 in a length direction (Y direction) of the sensor holding member 34 when the sensor holding member 34 moves in the length direction in a state where the one end 34A is locked by the locking portion 32A (Figs. 4A & 5B [0023]; note that when only elements 34A and 32A are locked, sensor holding member 34 will still be able to move partially in the length direction), and receives, by the engaging portion 34B, the sensor holding member 34 pressed by a counterreaction of biasing performed by the biasing member 35 on the temperature sensor 33 (Fig. 5B [0024, 0058-0059]).
Regarding claim 3, Watatani discloses the fixing device according to claim 1, wherein the heating device 30 further includes a reinforcing member 36 that abuts on the sensor holding member 34 (Fig. 3B [0036]) and is fixed to the sensor holding member 34 (via heater holding member 32) with the reinforcing member 36 facing the heater holding member 32 via the sensor holding member 34 (Fig. 3B [0044]).
PNG
media_image1.png
259
180
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Projecting member)][AltContent: textbox (Projecting member)]Regarding claim 4, Watatani discloses the fixing device according to claim 1, wherein the locking portion 32A is configured of a pair of projecting members with upper ends folded inward to form an opening (see annotated partial Fig. 4A below), and the one end 34A is inserted into the opening (Fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 5, Watatani discloses an image forming apparatus 100 comprising: the fixing device 1 according to claim 1 (Fig. 2 [0025]); and an image forming device 2 that forms an image on a recording medium S (Fig. 2 [0028]), wherein the fixing device 1 causes the image formed on the recording medium S by the image forming device 2 to be fixed (Fig. 2 [0028]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watatani (US 2020/0201218) in view of Mochizuki (US 2017/0308009).
Regarding claim 2, Watatani discloses the fixing device according to claim 1, wherein the biasing member 35 is a compression spring (Fig. 4B [0021]).
Watatani does not explicitly disclose a groove that receives one end of the compression spring is formed in a surface of the temperature sensor facing the sensor holding member in a state where the temperature sensor 33 is disposed in the heater holding member.
Mochizuki teaches a similar fixing device 6 (Fig. 2), and further teaches providing a groove within an element 17 to receive an end of a compression spring 18 that is used to bias a temperature sensor 15 (see Figs. 6a-6b [0084]).
Utilizing the teachings of Mochizuki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include a groove that receives one end of the compression spring formed in a surface of the temperature sensor facing the sensor holding member in a state where the temperature sensor is disposed in the heater holding member. One would have been motivated to make this modification in order to ensure that the compression spring is properly seated against the temperature sensor and provide adequate pressure.
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