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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 2/22/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2024-025383 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited on a Form PTO 1449 have been considered.
Specification
The specification has been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. However, the applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 7-9 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. Specifically, Claim 7 recites, and its dependent Claims 8-9 incorporate, inter alia, “the second liquid is supplied from the first tank into the cap via the first flow path in a state where the cap is at the contact position after the ejection process has been executed”. It is unclear what time does the “state” refer to, i.e. whether “the cap is at the contact position” while “the second liquid is supplied from the first tank into the cap” or “after the ejection process has been executed”. This makes the Claims indefinite.
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- is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komatsu et al. (U.S. 2011/0242206 A1) in view of Iimura et al. (U.S. 2020/0047506 A1).
Komatsu et al. disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a liquid ejecting apparatus (100, Title, §0048 and Fig. 1), comprising:
a head (16, §§0050-0051, 0063 and Fig. 2) comprising a nozzle (§0054) configured to eject a first liquid including a solid component (e.g. §§0101, 110) to a medium (P1, §0048 and Fig. 1);
a cap (P1, §0052 and Fig. 1) configured to be movable between a contact position where the cap contacts the head to cover the nozzle (e.g. Fig. 5) and a separated position where the cap is separated from the head (e.g. Fig. 3);
a first tank (60, §0052 and Fig. 2) configured to store a second liquid (W1, §0061) different from the first liquid and connected to the cap via a first flow path (62, §0052 and Fig. 2);
a second tank (400, §0052 and Fig. 2) connected to the cap via a second flow path (402, §0052 and Fig. 2) different from the first flow path;
wherein the printer is configured to execute:
a first supply process in which the second liquid is supplied into the cap via the first flow path from the first tank (§§0061, 0075 and Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the liquid ejecting apparatus is configured to operate in one of multiple modes including a first mode in which the first liquid is ejected to the medium (e.g. Fig. 3) and a second mode in which the first liquid is not ejected to the medium (e.g. Fig. 2), and
in a case where a first transition condition for the liquid ejecting apparatus to transition to the second mode is satisfied, execute the first supply process in a state where the cap is at the contact position (e.g. §0064); and
in a case where a second transition condition for the liquid ejecting apparatus to transition from the second mode to the first mode is satisfied, move the cap from the contact position to the separated position (§0075).
Regarding Claim 3, wherein the first transition condition is satisfied in a case where the first liquid has not been ejected from the head for more than a predetermined time period and/or in a case where an operation to turn off the liquid ejecting apparatus is performed (§§0039, 0054, 0060, 0172-0173).
Regarding Claim 5, wherein the printer is further configured to execute a replenishment process in which the second liquid is replenished into the cap via the first flow path from the first tank at a predetermined timing after the first supply process has been executed (e.g. §0064; please note that evaporation from the absorber 46 acts as a timer, thereby reading on the limitation “predetermined timing”).
Regarding Claim 6, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing after a predetermined time period from when the first supply process was executed (e.g. §0064; please note that evaporation from the absorber 46 acts as a timer, thereby reading on the limitation “predetermined timing”).
Regarding Claim 13, wherein the solid component comprises resin particles (§0110). Furthermore, this limitation amounts to a manner of operating the device. A manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claim from the prior art. Please see MPEP §2141 II.
Regarding Claim 14, set of liquids for use in the liquid ejecting apparatus according to claim 1, comprising: the first liquid (e.g. §§0101, 110) including the solid component, and the second liquid (W1, §0061).
Komatsu et al. do not disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a controller; however, the apparatus disclosed by Komatsu et al. inherently comprises a controller to enable the control disclosed in e.g. §§0026, 0028, 0067, 0074, 0091);
a density of the second liquid is higher than a density of the first liquid. However, this limitation amounts to a manner of operating the device. A manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claim from the prior art. Please see MPEP §2141 II;
a first discharge process in which the second liquid is discharged from the cap to the second tank via the second flow path.
Regarding Claim 2, in a case where a first transition condition for the liquid ejecting apparatus to transition to the second mode is satisfied, execute the first discharge process.
Regarding Claim 4, wherein the second transition condition is satisfied in a case where an operation to transition the liquid ejecting apparatus to the first mode is performed and/or in a case where an operation to turn on the liquid ejecting apparatus is performed.
Regarding Claims 10 and 15, wherein the second liquid comprises a surfactant and water. However, this limitation amounts to a manner of operating the device. A manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claim from the prior art. Please see MPEP §2141 II.
Regarding Claims 11 and 16, 1wherein the surfactant comprises an anionic surfactant. However, this limitation amounts to a manner of operating the device. A manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claim from the prior art. Please see MPEP §2141 II.
Regarding Claim 12 and 17, wherein the second liquid further 2 comprises a water-soluble polymer. However, this limitation amounts to a manner of operating the device. A manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claim from the prior art. Please see MPEP §2141 II.
Regarding Claim 14, the second liquid having a higher density than a density of the first liquid. However, Komatsu et al. teach the second liquid to contain glycerin at a high concentration that increases over time (§§0089, 0168). Since glycerin has a higher density and lower volatility than water, the second liquid will (at least at some point in time) inherently have a higher density than a density of the first liquid.
Iimura et al. disclose the following claimed limitations:
Regarding independent Claim 1, a first discharge process in which the second liquid is discharged from the cap to the second tank via the second flow path (§§0058-0060 and Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the first discharge process of Iimura et al. to the liquid ejecting apparatus of Komatsu et al. to enable replacement of the second liquid as necessary.
Regarding Claim 2, in a case where a first transition condition for the liquid ejecting apparatus to transition to the second mode is satisfied, execute the first discharge process (§§0058-0060 and Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the first discharge process of Iimura et al. to the liquid ejecting apparatus of Komatsu et al. to enable replacement of the second liquid as necessary.
Regarding Claim 4, wherein the second transition condition is satisfied in a case where an operation to transition the liquid ejecting apparatus to the first mode is performed and/or in a case where an operation to turn on the liquid ejecting apparatus is performed (§§0058-0060 and Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the first discharge process of Iimura et al. to the liquid ejecting apparatus of Komatsu et al. to enable replacement of the second liquid as necessary.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: the primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim 8 is the inclusion of the limitations of a liquid ejecting apparatus including wherein the controller is further configured to execute a third discharge process in which the first liquid is discharged from the cap to the second tank via the second flow path after the ejection process has been executed and before the second supply process is executed. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination of that has not been found, taught or suggested by prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim 9 is the inclusion of the limitations of a liquid ejecting apparatus including wherein the controller is configured to determine an amount of the second liquid to be supplied in the second supply process based on an amount of the first liquid ejected in the ejection process. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination of that has not been found, taught or suggested by prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shimazaki (U.S. 2009/0109257 A1) discloses a fluid ejecting apparatus that ejects a fluid includes a head that ejects the fluid, a first moisturizing cap device that covers the head to moisturize the head, and a first moisturizing liquid supply portion that supplies, to the first moisturizing cap device, a first moisturizing liquid for moisturizing the head when the first moisturizing cap device covers the head. Kamiyama (U.S. 2011/0227998 A1) discloses a liquid ejection device including a cap member and a system for supplying cleaning liquid to the cap member and discharging the cleaning liquid from the cap member. Saito (U.S 202/0047502 A1) discloses a liquid ejection device including a cap member and a system for supplying two different liquids to the cap member and discharging the liquids from the cap member.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV whose telephone number is (571)270-7049. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Douglas X Rodrigues can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
/ALEXANDER D SHENDEROV/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/JASON S UHLENHAKE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights