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 § 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 1-11,16-19 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.
In claims 1-11, the applicant uses the word “manuscript” which is unclear. The definition of “manuscript” is a book, document, or piece of music written by hand rather than typed or printed which does not seem to pertain to the invention claimed. See also claims 16-19.
In claim 1, the applicant claims conveying a “sheet”, forming an image onto the “sheet” and folding a “sheet” (lines 2-5); printing “a document” which includes “a first manuscript serving as the first page of the document and a second manuscript” (lines 8-10) and to control the orientation of the “first manuscript”. Therefore, the printed “document” includes a first and second printed manuscript however the applicant has previously used “sheet” to describe the printed document and thus this makes the claim indefinite. See also claim 16. There should be clear distinctions between the “sheet”, the “document” and the “manuscript”.
Claims 8-9 are unclear because they both depend on claim 7 which states the first manuscript is small while the second manuscript is large however both claims 8-9 give instances where the reverse is claimed (first manuscript is large while the second manuscript is small). See second paragraph of claim 9 and paragraphs 3-4 in claim 8.
Additionally, in claim 8, the first paragraph reads on applicant’s Fig.5 (i.e. first printed sheet is small, second printed sheet large; first printed sheet is portrait, second printed sheet is landscape such that the lower side of the second sheet is conveyed downstream) however, the second paragraph is unclear. In other words, if the first sheet is small and the second sheet is large (Fig.s 5 or 7); the first printed sheet being orientated as landscape does not apply to either of Fig.s 5 or 7 scenarios. There are other similar inconsistencies in both claims 8-9.
It is noted that claims 8-9 are so unclear and inconsistent that a determination of patentability is precluded until the examiner receives more clarification.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim 1, lines 11-14, the applicant claims a first print mode which controls the orientation of the first manuscript to be the same orientation as the second manuscript which is not supported by the specification.
From the specification and drawings, referring to Fig.2, the “first print mode” is the “same direction” print mode having a “page orientation control” and the “second print mode” is the “different direction” print mode having another “page orientation control”. Fig.3 is the “same direction” print mode while Fig.4 is the “different direction” print mode. Fig.s 5-8 pertain to the “same direction” print mode while Fig.s 9-12 pertain to the “different direction” print mode. See specification page 7, last line – page 13, line 16.
Therefore, in the first print mode (same direction mode) and referring to Fig.s 5-8, the orientation of the first and second printed manuscripts are not in the same direction (portrait and landscape are mixed). Referring to Fig.s 5-12, none of the first and second printed manuscripts have the same orientation and thus there is no support for the first print mode as claimed.
See claims 12 and 16 for similar issues.
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.
Claims 1-4,10-13,16,18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyazaki (U.S. 2005/0207812).
Regarding claims 1,12,16, Miyazaki teach an image forming apparatus which includes a conveyor to convey a sheet (or applicant’s manuscript), an image forming unit to form an image onto the sheets, and a post processing unit 9 to fold the sheet after the image is formed (see par.28-34,41-44). A controller 1 receives a user input to switch between folding modes (par. 45, step S12 in Fig.6) and the image forming apparatus is capable of printing on different sized sheets (par.73). If a mode is selected that does not require Z-folding (Fig.6; “No” in S12; par. 56-57), the normal printing/sheet selection will be implemented (S13,S14) that does not require image rotation or folding and thus the first and second sheets will have the same orientation (applicant’s first mode). However, if the Z-fold mode is selected (Fig.6; “Yes” in S12; par 58), the image will be rotated and the printed sheets will be folded (applicant’s second mode). As seen in Fig.s 7-9, the controller will rotate the image data so that the orientation of the first sheet will be different from the orientation of the second sheet (Fig.7 has first sheet as portrait while the second sheet will be landscape or in Fig.9, the first sheet will be landscape while the second sheet is portrait orientation).
Regarding claim 2, the post-process is Z-folding the sheet (par. 34).
Regarding claim 3, a user interface 6,7 (par. 33) includes a selection as to the mode to be performed (par. 45)
Regarding claim 4, the image forming apparatus receives commands/mode selections from an external device such as a host computer (par.41,55-56).
Regarding claim 10, the controller adjusts the orientation of at least one of the first or second sheets as seen in Fig.7.
Regarding claim 11, the controller adjusts the orientation of the first sheet to be portrait which is perpendicular to the orientation of the second sheet (landscape) as shown in Fig.7.
Regarding claim 13, the first image would be printed on the first sheet and the second image would be printed on the second sheet.
Regarding claims 18-19, the image forming unit performs orientation control of the first and second printed sheet.
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.
Claims 5-7,14-15,17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki (U.S. 2005/0207812) in view of Takahashi (U.S. 8,600,287).
Miyazaki further teach to only convey the second sheet having the larger size (A3 size) in the horizontal or short edge feed (SEF) direction (see par.37). The first smaller sheet (A4 size) is conveyed in the vertical or long edge feed (LEF) direction as shown in Fig.s 7-9). Specifically, Miyazaki teach all that is claimed except also conveying the first smaller sheet in the horizontal direction and only folding the second sheet but not the first sheet.
Takahashi teach an image forming apparatus 300 which includes a conveyor feeding unit 360 to convey a sheet (or applicant’s manuscript), an image forming unit to form an image onto the sheets, and a post processing unit 800 to Z- fold the sheet after the image is formed (see Fig.2,8 and col.3, lines 15-27, 55-61). As seen in Fig.18-19, a first and second sheet have different sizes and the first smaller sheet can be conveyed in the horizontal (Fig.18) or vertical direction (Fig.19) and folded with the larger second sheet (see col. 11, lines 1-46). Regarding claim 6, it sometimes is not desired to perform folding on the A4 size sheet (first sheet) as shown in Fig.19 (see col.11, lines 25-36). Regarding claim 7, as described with regard to Miyazaki the final outputted document will have a small manuscript (sheet) size such as A4 and a large manuscript (sheet) size such as A3; the small size can be the first sheet size and the large size can be the second sheet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to also include the option of conveying the first sheet in the horizontal direction and to fold or not fold the first image so as to give the user more options regarding the final outputted printed sheets which have mixed sizes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sakura, Mochizuki et al., Masaki, and Sasaki all teach image and/or sheet orientation control and folding post processing control when using differently sized sheets that appear relevent to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT B BEATTY whose telephone number is (571) 272-2130. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 7 to 3.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Stephanie Bloss, can be reached on (571) 272-3555. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-2130.
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).
/ROBERT B BEATTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852