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 .
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.
Claims 9 and 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyasaka et al. US 2018/0239996 A1 (hereinafter “Miyasaka”, cited in an IDS) in view of Moriyama JP 2007-182316 A (hereinafter “Moriyama”).
Regarding claim 9, Miyasaka teaches a medium conveyance apparatus comprising:
an apparatus body (12); and
a reverse path unit (30, refer to FIGS. 4 and 6) including a reverse roller (38) configured to reverse a medium, the reverse path unit being configured to be attachable/detachable to/from the apparatus body, wherein
the reverse path unit includes
a support tray (44) configured to switch between a drawn state (state of 44 shown in FIG. 4) where the support tray is drawn out from the reverse path unit and a stored state (state of 44 shown in FIG. 5) where the support tray is stored in the reverse path unit, and configured to support a medium to be fed in the drawn state,
a placement unit (32) on which the medium supported by the support tray is placed, and
a hopper unit (35) configured to switch an inclination angle of the placement unit.
Miyasaka teaches the clamed invention except wherein the placement unit and the hopper are part of the reverse path unit.
Moriyama teaches the desirability of integrally attaching/detaching a reverse path unit (38) with a feeding placement unit (30) to an apparatus main body (refer to FIGS. 3, 7, 8, and 13) to easily expose and easily remove a jammed sheet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Miyasaka’s reverse path unit to integrally be attached to placement unit as taught by Moriyama as a known alternative arrangement to further provide access to easily remove a jam, while providing a larger clearance inside the main body. The combination of references would make obvious providing the hopper to similarly be integrally attached with the reverse path unit for the same purpose.
Regarding claim 10, Miyasaka view of Moriyama teaches wherein the reverse path unit includes a separation roller (Miyasaka’ roller 36, refer to FIG. 6) configured to separate, into one sheet, a medium to be supplied.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 1-8 are allowable because no prior art was found to teach or suggest an “opening portion provided in the support tray and configured to enable operation of the operation unit” as claimed in combination with the other elements of the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS A GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3094. The examiner can normally be reached 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.
/LUIS A GONZALEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653