DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, execution of another blowing operation “regardless of the number of sheets” (Claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
In Fig. 5, where S9=NO, the loop goes back to S7, from which another blowing operation is carried out. As such, it is seen to be dependent on the number of sheets, not regardless of.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-14 and 16 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.
Regarding Claim 1, lines 13-14, “regardless of the number of sheets” is recited with respect to another blowing operation. However as described in the drawing objections above, it appears that the another blowing operation is indeed dependent on the number of sheets, not regardless of. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are not understood.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the feeding means" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. By the present amendment, feeding means was changed to feeding roller in Claim 1. It is noted that Claim 13 should not be corrected in such a way as to require the (single) sheet feeding roller of Claim 1 to include multiple rollers.
Claims 2-12, 14 and 16 are rejected by dependency.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwami (US Pub No. 2023/0219776 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Iwami discloses
a supporting portion (514) configured to support a sheet;
a feeding roller (501) configured to feed a sheet supported on the supporting portion;
an air blowing portion (511A, 512A) configured to blow air to a side end of the sheet (Fig. 3);
a control means (100) configured to execute (1) a blowing operation (S32, Fig. 10) in which the air is blown to the side end of the sheet by the air blowing portion and (2) a feeding operation (S35, Fig. 10) in which a predetermined number of sheets (i.e. 2) are fed by the feeding roller in a state of stopping the blowing operation (i.e. after S34, Fig. 10),
wherein after execution of the blowing operation, the control means executes the feeding operation in a state of stopping the blowing operation in a case in which a predetermined time has not elapsed from completion of the blowing operation (i.e. wherein the predetermined time may be a time point at S37 for the second of the 2 sheets, prior to which the first sheet is fed in S35) until the predetermined number of sheets have been fed, and executes another blowing operation regardless of the number of sheets which have been fed in a case in which the predetermined time has elapsed from the completion of the blowing operation (i.e. at the elapse of time point S37 for the second of the 2 sheets, S32 is executed again, for the second sheet) until the predetermined number of sheets have been fed, and then executes the feeding operation (i.e. S35 executed for the second sheet) in a state of stopping the another blowing operation.
It is noted that the predetermined time is not defined and may be interpreted as above. Furthermore, the claim does not require measurement of time or the operations to be performed on the same sheet (i.e. wherein performing them across multiple sheets satisfies the claim). Also see the 112 rejection above.
Regarding Claim 12, Iwami discloses
in a case in which a job in which a designated number of sheets are fed is executed, the control means repeats the feeding operation from completion of a last blowing operation until the predetermined time elapses (i.e. from S37 to S35, time of the second sheet elapsing), and when the predetermined time has elapsed from the completion of the last blowing operation (i.e. after the second sheet), the control means repeatedly stops the feeding operation and executes another blowing operation until completion of feeding the designate number of sheets (i.e. by carrying out the second iteration, it has executed another blowing operation and subsequently completed feeding).
Regarding Claim 13, Iwami discloses
the feeding means includes (1) a first roller (501) configured to contact the uppermost sheet and feed the sheet from the supporting portion in a sheet feeding direction (right to left in Fig. 3), (2) a second roller (502) disposed downstream of the first roller in the sheet feeding direction and configured to feed the sheet in the sheet feeding direction, and (3) a third roller (503) configured to form a separating nip by contacting the second roller and configured to apply a friction force to the sheet passing through the separating nip in a direction opposite to the sheet feeding direction (i.e. 503 is a retard roller and separates multi-fed sheets), and
wherein the air blowing portion includes (1) a fan (511b/512b) configured to generate an air flow and (2) a nozzle (511a/512a) configured to blow the air flow toward an end portion of the sheet in a sheet widthwise direction perpendicular to the sheet feeding direction (Fig. 3).
Also see the 112 rejection above.
Regarding Claim 14, Iwami discloses
an image forming means (201B) configured to form an image on a sheet fed by the sheet feeding device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-11 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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: None of the prior art of record shows changing or determining the predetermined time as claimed (Claims 2-8). The prior art also does not show job control, a sheet detecting means as claimed, in combination with the remaining elements (Claims 9-11) or counting predetermined time as claimed (Claim 16).
Response to Arguments
In response to Applicant’s argument that “Applicant further respectfully directs the Examiner’s attention to, e.g., Iwami Fig. 7…” (pages 2-3), it is noted that the rejection relies upon Fig. 10 of Iwami for the claimed matter. Additionally, see the 112 rejection above regarding metes and bounds of the claim and the current 102 rejection of record.
Applicant's arguments filed 3/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PRASAD GOKHALE whose telephone number is (571)270-3543. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am - 5:30pm.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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.
/PRASAD V GOKHALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653 April 6, 2026