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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 4, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the prior art fails to teach the first motor driven in the individual drive mode is a motor included in the plurality of motors that drive the image forming unit and the conveyance roller. However this argument is not persuasive since the claims state, “a plurality of motors including a first motor and a second motor and configured to drive the image forming unit and the conveyance roller; the first motor and the second motor configured to operate simultaneously during the first period.” Applicant goes on to argue that the teaching of Group E which continuously operates negates the teachings of Groups A-D which are more selective. Thus applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Group D includes parts such as the photoconductor (i.e., the image forming unit) and Group C which includes parts relating to sheet feeding form the cassette (i.e., the conveyance roller), see ¶0105. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive based on the teachings in ¶0105.
Furthermore, applicant argues that the prior art fails to teach or suggest the one or more servers are configured to notify based on a sound “in a period which is different from the image forming period and during which only the first motor among the plurality of motors operates.” However this is taught by Ogino who only does sound detection when no sheet is on the conveyance path (S601).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai US 2016/0112602 A1 (Kawai) and Ogino et al. US 2020/0324990 A1 (Ogino).
Regarding claims 2, 8 and 9, Kawai teaches an image forming system comprising:
an image forming apparatus (1);
a display unit (500) capable of displaying information (¶0061);
the image forming apparatus including: an image forming unit configured to perform an image forming operation for forming an image on a recording material during an image forming period including a first period (¶0027);
a conveyance roller (pair 260) configured to convey the recording material;
a sound collector (Ma-Me) configured to receive a sound (¶0059);
a plurality of motors including a first motor and a second motor (two of groups D and C) and configured to drive the image forming unit (1) and the conveyance roller (260);
the first motor (Group D) and the second motor (Group C) configured to operate simultaneously during the first period (FIG. 10);
a control unit (10) configured to implement, in a case where a predetermined condition related to the number of sheets printed by the image forming apparatus is satisfied (i.e., the number of prints, ¶0091-¶0092), an individual drive mode in which only the first motor (E) among the plurality of motors operations during a second period different from the image forming period (¶0111),
wherein, in a case where the predetermined condition is not satisfied, the control unit configured to not implement the individual drive mode (i.e., the number of jobs has no reached the threshold, or simply the noise has not occurred).
Kawai differs from the instant claimed invention by not explicitly disclosing: one or more servers wherein the one or more servers (¶0160-¶0162) are configured to notify the display unit to cause the display unit to display information relating to a component causing an abnormal sounds on a basis of the sound received by the sound collector during the second period in which the individual drive mode has been implemented (¶0107-¶0111). However, this is a known alternative. Ogino teaches the image forming system the plurality of drive units (206, 519, 520), the sound detection unit (microphone 70), and the control unit (203), and wherein the server apparatuses is configured to perform the identification operation (¶0052-¶0053). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the alternative configuration taught by Ogino where the server is used to perform the identification information instead of doing that on the device taught by Kawai, since the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing.
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Kawai teaches the image forming system according to claims 2 and 9, wherein the second period is a period following the image forming period (¶0139).
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Kawai teaches the image forming system according to claims 2 and 9, wherein the individual drive mode is configured to be implemented each time the image forming apparatus prints a predetermined number of sheets (every 100, ¶0112).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Kawai teaches the image forming system according to claims 2 and 9, the image forming system according to wherein the individual drive mode is a first individual drive mode (s109), and an individual drive mode in which only the second motor (group C, FIG. 10) is driven among the plurality of motors during the second period is a second individual drive mode (s111-s112), and
wherein, in a case where the predetermined condition is satisfied after the first individual drive mode has been implemented, the second individual drive mode (YES to s115) is configured to be implemented (FIG. 11B).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA L ELEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9793. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM CST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Walter Jr. Lindsay can be reached on (571)272-1674. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JESSICA L ELEY/
Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights