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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/18/25, 4/2/25, and 10/8/25 have been considered.
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 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: first coupling, second coupling, connecting portion in claims 1, 15, and 19 and pushing part in claims 15 and 19.
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
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 1-4 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maeshima et al. (US 10,025,266).
Regarding claim 1, Maeshima discloses a process cartridge 70 (col. 6, lines 53-65, fig. 3), comprising: a drum unit 26, including a photosensitive drum 1 and a photosensitive frame 27; a developing unit 4, including a developing roller 26 and a developing frame 31, wherein the developing unit is capable of moving relative to the drum unit between a first position (fig. 10) in which the developing roller contacts the photosensitive drum and a second position (fig. 9) in which the developing roller is separated from the photosensitive drum (col. 7, line 66 – col. 8, line 8); a first coupling 16, configured to receive a rotational driving force and transmit the rotational driving force to the photosensitive drum (col. 7, lines 59-63) ; a second coupling 20, configured to receive the rotational driving force and transmit the rotational driving force to the developing roller (col. 11, lines 20-48); a driving-side end cover 43 (fig. 18), disposed at one end of the developing unit, wherein the driving- side end cover includes a hole (see cutout area on part 16, fig. 18) through which a portion of the first coupling is exposed to outside of the driving-side end cover; and a connecting portion 41, configured to movably connect the developing unit with the drum unit (col. 13, line 64 - col. 14, line 48, fig. 20-21), wherein the connecting portion 41 is disposed at one end of the process cartridge (fig. 16); and when viewed along a length direction of the process cartridge, the connecting portion 41 is not overlapped with the second coupling 20 (fig. 16, 20).
Regarding claim 2, Maeshima discloses wherein the connecting portion 41 is positioned below a rotation axis of the second coupling 21 along a height direction of the process cartridge (fig. 21).
Regarding claim 3, Maeshima discloses wherein the connecting portion 41 is closer to a lower end of the driving-side end cover 43 than a rotation axis of the second coupling 20 along a height direction of the process cartridge (fig. 18).
Regarding claim 4, Maeshima discloses wherein the connecting portion 41 is closer to a rear end of the driving-side end cover 43 than a rotation axis of the first coupling 16 along a width direction of the process cartridge (fig. 18).
Regarding claim 15, Maeshima discloses the process cartridge as discussed in claim 1 and further discloses a pushing part 41a (fig. 19), configured to receive a force to move the developing unit from the first position to the second position (col. 14, lines 14-18).
Regarding claim 16, Maeshima discloses wherein the connecting portion 41 is positioned above the pushing part 41a along a height direction of the process cartridge (fig. 19).
Regarding claim 17, Maeshima discloses wherein the pushing part 41a includes an abutting surface, configured to receive a force moving the developing unit from the first position to the second position, wherein a surface extending along an extension direction of the abutting surface is not perpendicular to a surface of the driving-side end cover (col. 14, lines 14-18, fig. 19).
Regarding claim 18, Maeshima discloses wherein the pushing part 41a includes an abutting surface, configured to receive a force moving the developing unit from the first position to the second position, wherein a surface extending along an extension direction of the abutting surface is not in parallel with a surface of the driving-side end cover (col. 14, lines 14-18, fig. 19).
Regarding claim 19, Maeshima discloses the process cartridge as discussed in claim 15 and further discloses wherein the pushing part 41a includes an abutting surface, and configured to receive a force to move the developing unit from the first position to the second position (col. 14, lines 14-18); when viewed along a length direction of the process cartridge, the connecting portion is not overlapped with the second coupling; and a surface extending along an extension direction of the abutting surface is not perpendicular to or in parallel with a surface of the driving-side end cover or the photosensitive frame (fig. 19).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-14 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claims 5-11, the prior art of record neither disclose or suggest the process cartridge comprising all the features of claim 1, and wherein the driving-side end cover further includes a notch portion; the notch portion extends upward to an upper end of the driving-side end cover or extends backward to a rear end of the driving-side end cover; and a portion of the second coupling is exposed to outside of the driving- side end cover through the notch portion.
As to claims 12-14, the prior art of record neither disclose or suggest the process cartridge comprising all the features of claim 1, and wherein the connecting portion includes a supporting column and a guiding portion; a developing protection cover is further disposed on a side of the developing frame; the supporting column is disposed on the developing protection cover; and the guiding portion is disposed on the driving- side end cover; and the supporting column is inserted in the guiding portion; and the guiding portion limits relative movement of the supporting column.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hoang Ngo whose telephone number is (571)272-2138. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am - 4:00 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 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.
/HOANG X NGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852