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.
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 2-3 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.
Claims 2 recites the limitation "the two sensors" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2 recites the limitation "the two unit lifting devices" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 recites the limitation "the apparatus” in n line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 recites the limitation "the two unit lifting devices" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 recites the limitation "the two sensors" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 recites the limitation "the different tanks" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoyagi (US 2018/0015726) in view of Usui (US 2017/0297345).
With regard to claim 1, Aoyagi discloses an inkjet recording apparatus (31) [Para. 0035] comprising:
a unit which is provided with a tank (B) [Para. 0080; Fig. 2] for storing liquid;
a unit lifting device (47) [Fig. 8] which lifts and lowers the unit [Fig. 2];
a control part (5) [Para. 0037] which controls the unit lifting device; and
a sensor (K) [Para. 0112] which detects a rise of a liquid surface in the tank [height L2 of the ink level in ink tank B; Para. 0112; Fig 2], wherein
Aoyagi does not disclose the sensor is provided at two positions separated in a horizontal direction, and the control part determines that the unit tilts when one of the sensors detects the rise of the liquid surface.
Usui teaches sensors provided at two positions separated in a horizontal direction [Fig. 2B, 2C] and the control part (30) [detection circuit; Para. 0112] determines that the unit (20) [container; Para. 0112] tilts when one of the sensors detects the rise of the liquid surface [based on capacitance and level of the liquid; Step S106;Para. 0112]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the apparatus of Aoyagi with sensors provided at two positions separated in a horizontal direction for the purpose of accurately detecting the remaining ink amount and determining when the unit tilts as taught by Usui for the purpose of outputting a warning messing about ink shortage.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoyagi (US 2018/0015726) in view of Asami (US 2010/177148) and further in view of Usui (US 2017/0297345).
With regard to claim 4, Aoyagi discloses an inkjet recording apparatus (31) [Para. 0035] comprising:
a unit (361) [placement table; Para. 0091] which is provided with a tank (B) [Para. 0080; Fig. 2] for storing liquid;
a unit lifting device (362) [moving mechanism; Para. 0091] which lifts and lowers the unit [Fig. 2];
a control part (5) [Para. 0037] which controls the unit lifting device; and
a sensor (K) [Para. 0112] which detects a height of the liquid surface [Para. 0112]
Aoyagi does not disclose a sensor using a floating body floated on the liquid, wherein the sensor is provided at a position separated from a center of the tank in a horizontal direction, and the control part determines that the unit tilts when a change in height of the liquid surface detected by the sensor is equal to or larger than a threshold value.
Asami teaches a sensor (45) using a floating body (45a) [float member; Para 0057] floated on the liquid, wherein the sensor is provided at a position separated from a center of the tank in a horizontal direction [Fig. 1],
Usui teaches a control part (30) [detection circuit; Para. 0112] determines that the unit (20) [container; Para. 0112] tilts when a change in height of the liquid surface detected by the sensor is equal to or larger than a threshold value [based on capacitance and level of the liquid; Step S106;Para. 0094, 0112]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a sensor using a floating body in the apparatus of Aoyagi as taught by Asami for the purpose of accurately detecting the remaining ink amount.
In addition, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a control part to determine that the unit tilts when a change in height of the liquid surface detected by the sensor is equal to or larger than a threshold for the purpose of outputting a warning messing about ink shortage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACEY M MCMILLION whose telephone number is (571)270-5193. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-2:30PM 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, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached at 571-272-5960. 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.
/TRACEY M MCMILLION/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights