DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
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: “section” in all claims.
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 § 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.
Claim 6 is 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. The claim recites an upper opening and a lower opening that are “open across plural surfaces.” It is not understood what this language is intended to mean. Clarification is required.
Because claim 7 depends from claim 6, it is also rejected on this basis.
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) 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanibuchi (2014/0267524) in view of Suzuki et al. (2022/0219457).
Regarding claim 1, Wanibuchi teaches a printing device comprising:
a head (fig. 3, item 41) that is accommodated in the housing (fig. 3, item 1) and that ejects a liquid onto a medium (fig. 3, item P);
an opening and closing cover (fig. 2, item 2) that includes a second partition (fig. 1, shown portion of item 2) constituting a part of a front surface of the housing (see fig. 2), and that opens and closes the housing around a pivot axis (compare figs. 1, 2);
a suction section (fig. 4, item 60) configured to suck gas that is inside the housing ([0054]);
an outer side duct (fig. 4, item 54) that is fixed to the second partition (figs. 2, 3, note that platen 34 is fixed to second partition 2, and outer side duct 54 is fixed to platen) and that is in communication with the suction section (see fig. 4); and
an inner side duct (fig. 4, item 55) that is fixed to the housing (see fig. 2) and that is configured to communicate with the outer side duct (see fig. 4),
wherein the inner side duct has an inner side connection opening section (see fig. 4, portion of 55 connecting with portion 54) that is open towards the front surface and that is configured to connect with the outer side duct (see fig. 4, note that a portion of item 55 is open toward front surface),
the outer side duct includes an outer side connection opening section (fig. 4, note opening in 54) configured to contact with and to separate from the inner side connection opening section in accordance with closing and opening of the opening and closing cover ([0056]), and
in the inner side connection opening section, a first end section close to the upper surface is closer to the pivot axis than a second end section that is distant from the upper surface (see figs. 2, 4, Note that first end section of inner side connecting opening portion 55 contacting fan 51 is further from the pivot axis than portion slightly higher on 55 and closer to the cover 2).
Wanibuchi does not teach wherein the cover includes a first partition constituting a part of an upper surface of a housing. Suzuki teaches this (Suzuki, see fig. 1, Note that cover 13 has a first partition top portion and a second partition front partition and is rotatable). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the cover disclosed by Suzuki for that disclosed by Wanibuchi because doing so would allow for both the front and top of the printer to be opened, thereby facilitating greater access to the components within the housing
Regarding claim 2, Wanibuchi in view Suzuki teaches the printing device according to claim 1, wherein the inner side connection opening section is inclined so as to face the front surface and upward (Wanibuchi, see fig. 4, Note that a portion of the inner side connection opening section 55 is inclined).
Regarding claim 3, Wanibuchi in view Suzuki teaches the printing device according to claim 1, further comprising; a gas flow generating section (Wanibuchi, fig. 4, item 51) that is in communication with the inner side duct and that generates a gas flow (Wanibuchi, [0054]), wherein the inner side duct includes an upright duct on a side that is closer to the gas flow generating section than is the inner side connection opening section (Wanibuchi, fig. 4, Note portion of 55 closer to fan has upright walls).
Regarding claim 4, Wanibuchi in view Suzuki teaches the printing device according to claim 3, wherein the upright duct is a frame constituting the housing (Wanibuchi, fig. 4, Note portion of 55 closest to fan 51 has been defined as “part of the housing”).
Regarding claim 5, Wanibuchi in view Suzuki teaches the printing device according to claim 3, wherein the upright duct is formed of a hollow angular member (Wanibuchi, fig. 4, Note that there is an angled portion of item 55 close to the fan 51).
Regarding claim 6, Wanibuchi in view Suzuki teaches the printing device according to claim 5, wherein the angular member has an upper opening that is open across plural surfaces and a lower opening that is formed below the upper opening and that is open across plural surfaces, the upper opening is configured so that gas flowing from the inner side connection opening section flows into the upper opening, and the lower opening is configured so that gas flows out toward the gas flow generating section (Wanibuchi, see fig. 4, Note that all portions of the inner duct, including the angular member, can be said to be “open across plural surfaces”).
Regarding claim 7, Wanibuchi in view Suzuki teaches the printing device according to claim 6, wherein the lower opening is formed above the lower end of the angular member (Wanibuchi, see fig. 4)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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 571-202-5960. 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights