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 .
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, the “intermediate transfer member having its ends joined by a splice” (claim 9) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality: Page 8, line 4, “130” should be written as “135”. Appropriate correction is required.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5 are objected to because of the following informality: claim 1, last line, “greater the” should be written as “greater than the”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-2, 6, 10-11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiroyasu et al. (JP 2004-252203; cited in IDS filed 2/28/2025)
Regarding claim 1, Hiroyasu et al. discloses a conditioning device comprising: a first light emitting member (an exposure device) 4 to emit light towards a photoconductive surface 1 movable along a continuous path, the first light emitting member 4 to emit light towards a first segment of the path located upstream an engagement point (a nip point between drum 1 and roller 14) of the continuous path at which the photoconductive surface 1 is to contact an intermediate transfer member 10 (paragraph [0015]; Figs. 1-2 and 7), and a second light emitting member (a charge removing unit) 46 to emit light towards the photoconductive surface 1, the second light emitting member 46 to emit light towards a second segment of the path located downstream the engagement point (the nip point between drum 1 and roller 14)(paragraph [0024]; Figs. 2 and 7), wherein the light emitted by the first light emitting member 4 is to set the photoconductive surface 1 at a pre-transfer voltage (-50V) and the light emitted by the second light emitting member 46 is to set the photoconductive surface 1 at a post-transfer voltage (0V) greater than the pre-transfer voltage (-50V) (paragraphs [0028]-[0030]).
Regarding claim 2, Hiroyasu et al. discloses a charging roller 3a to contact the photoconductive surface 1 at a third segment of the path, the third segment located upstream the first segment (around the first light emitting member 4) and downstream the second segment (around the second light emitting member 46) (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Hiroyasu et al. discloses a printing system comprising: an intermediate transfer member 10; a photoconductive sleeve 1 arranged to contact the intermediate transfer member 10 at an engagement point (Fig. 7); a first light emitting member 4 arranged to project light onto a first segment of a path for rotation of the photoconductive sleeve 1, the first segment of the photoconductive sleeve 1 located upstream the engagement point; and a second light emitting member 46 arranged to project light onto a second segment of the path, the second segment located downstream the engagement point (the nip point between the drum 1 and the intermediate transfer member 10) (Figs. 2 and 7), wherein as the photoconductive sleeve 1 rotates along the path, the first light emitting member 4 is to set a photoconductive region of the photoconductive sleeve 1 at a pre-transfer voltage (-50V) and the second light emitting member 46 is to set the photoconductive region at a post-transfer voltage (0V) greater than the pre-transfer voltage (-50V) (paragraphs [0028]-[0030]).
Regarding claim 10, Hiroyasu et al. discloses a roller 14 pressable against the photoconductive sleeve 1 at the engagement point, the roller 14 being electrically charged at a roller voltage (+400V) greater than the post-transfer voltage (0V) (paragraphs [0030] and [0038]).
Regarding claim 11, Hiroyasu et al. discloses wherein a voltage difference between the post-transfer voltage (0V) and the pre-transfer voltage (-50V) is less than 60V.
Regarding claim 13, Hiroyasu et al. discloses a method comprising: rotating a photoconductive sleeve 1 along a rotation path; emitting a first light beam 4 in a first segment of the rotation path, the first segment being upstream an engagement point in which the photoconductive sleeve 1 contacts with an intermediate transfer member 10 (Figs. 2 and 7), and emitting a second light beam 46 in a second segment of the rotation path, the second segment being downstream the engagement point (Figs. 2 and 7), wherein as the photoconductive sleeve 1 rotates, the first light beam 4 sets a region of photoconductive sleeve 1 moving through the first segment at a pre-transfer voltage (-50V) and the second light beam 46 sets the region of the photoconductive sleeve 1 moving through the second segment at a post-transfer voltage (0V) greater than the pre-transfer voltage (-50V) (paragraphs [0028]-[0030]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyasu et al.
Hiroyasu et al., as discussed above, further discloses the first light emitting member 4 comprising a first plurality of light emitting elements to emit a first amount of light associated with the pre-transfer voltage across a width of the photoconductive surface 1 (paragraph [0015]); and the second light emitting member 46 comprising a fluorescent lamp, a line-shaped electroluminescence, or a discharge device such as a corona discharge (paragraph [0024]).
Hiroyasu et al. differs from the instant claimed invention in not disclosing the second light emitting member comprising a second plurality of light emitting elements to emit a second amount of light associated with the post-transfer voltage light across the width of the photoconductive surface.
Although Hiroyasu et al. does not disclose the second light emitting member being a plurality of light emitting elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to apply the plurality of light emitting elements as taught by the first light emitting member of Hiroyasu et al. to the second light emitting member of Hiroyasu et al. because of the same functionality for emitting light to change potential on the photoconductive surface.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyasu et al. in view of Schlueter, Jr. et al. (US Pat. No. 6,245,402 B1; cited in IDS filed 2/28/2025)
Hiroyasu et al., as discussed above, differs from the instant claimed invention in not disclosing the intermediate transfer member having its ends joined by a splice, wherein the intermediate transfer member and the splice have different electrical conductivity coefficients.
Schlueter, Jr. et al. discloses an intermediate transfer belt (column 9, lines 25-28) having its ends joined by a splice 11, wherein the intermediate transfer member and the splice have different electrical conductivity coefficients (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to apply the splice as taught by Schlueter, Jr. et al. to the intermediate transfer member of Hiroyasu et al. to have the intermediate transfer belt without significant degradation of the final image (Schlueter, Jr. et al., column 8, lines 16-21).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyasu et al. in view of Kodama et al. (US Pat. No. 5,966,560)
Hiroyasu et al., as discussed above, differs from the instant claimed in not disclosing the first light beam comprising emitting a first light intensity and emitting the second light beam comprising emitting a second light intensity greater than the first light intensity, the second light intensity being greater than 500 µW/cm2.
Kodama et al. discloses an intensity of light emission of a pretransfer eraser 1017 being set at 0.69 mW/cm2 (690µW/cm2) (column 20, line 64 to column 21, line 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to apply the light intensity being greater than 500 µW/cm2 as taught by Kodama et al. to the second light beam of Hiroyasu et al. because of the same functionality for erasing charge on the photoconductive surface.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 12, and 15 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.
Other Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kasai et al. (US Pat. No. 4,791,452) discloses an image forming apparatus comprising: a first light emitting member; a second light emitting member; a charging member (a corona charger); and a transfer member.
Okubo et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. US 2019/0265625 A1) discloses an image forming apparatus comprising: a photoconductive member; a first light emitting member; a second light emitting member; a charging roller; an intermediate transfer belt; and a transfer roller.
Odagiri (US Pat. Pub. No. US 2019/0354043 A1) discloses an image forming apparatus comprising: a photoconductive member; a first light emitting member (an exposure device); a second light emitting member (a charge neutralizing device); a charging roller; an intermediate transfer belt; and a transfer roller.
Kanai et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. US 2020/0310275 A1) discloses an image forming apparatus comprising: a first light emitting member; a second light emitting member; a charging roller; and a transfer member.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA S CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/SOPHIA S CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Ssc
February 6, 2026