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 1-21 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.
With respect to claim 1, the language “wherein the second central axis is not on the same virtual plane as the first central axis is” in the last line of the claim is unclear in meaning and scope. In particular, the term “the same virtual plane” has no proper antecedent basis because no virtual plane was previously recited in the claim. Additionally, it is noted that since no virtual planes have been otherwise defined in the claim relative to the other recited structures, it is not clear what these “virtual” planes are or in what geometrical orientation they are intended to be occurring. Generally speaking, to properly define a plane, the location of three points in space are necessary and since the claim recites only a first central axis and second central axis (which are essentially lines), the particular orientation of any virtual plane relative to the central axis has not been clearly defined in the claim.
With respect to claim 20, the phrase “the second guide being to be drawn out” in line 3 is awkward and confusing. To correct this issue, it is suggested that the term “being” be deleted from this phrase.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification 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.
Claims 1 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 60-48456 U (hereafter referred to as JP ‘456).
With respect to claim 1, JP ‘456 teaches a printing cassette (Fig. 4) comprising:
a tape roll 19 including a tape 21 to be used for printing (i.e., note the ink ribbon 21 can be considered to be a “tape” to be used for printing), the tape being wound about an axis parallel to a first direction (i.e., the vertical direction); and
a case 11 that accommodates the tape roll therein,
wherein the case has:
a first guide 25, at least a part of the first guide being arranged at the same position as the tape roll in the first direction (i.e., the vertical direction), the first guide 25 being configured to guide the tape 21 drawn off the tape roll 19 to alter both a first component (i.e., vertical direction) and a second component (i.e., horizontal direction) of a conveying direction of the tape 21, the first component being parallel to the first direction and the second component being orthogonal to the first direction; and
a second guide 23 arranged to a different position (i.e., a lower position) from the tape roll 19 in the first direction (i.e., the vertical direction), the second guide being configured to guide the tape guided by the first guide to alter both the first component and the second component of the conveying direction,
wherein the first guide 25 has a first guide surface whose shape is defined by a part of an outer circumferential surface (i.e., a cylindrical surface) of a virtual first circular column or a virtual first elliptical column, each having a first central axis 26 inclined relative to the first direction (as shown in Figure 5),
wherein the second guide 23 has a second guide surface whose shape is defined by a part of an outer circumferential surface(i.e., a cylindrical surface) of a virtual second circular column or a virtual second elliptical column, each having a second central axis 24 inclined relative to the first direction (as shown in Figure 5), and
wherein the second central axis is not on the same virtual plane as the first central axis is. Particular attention is invited to Figures 4-6 and the English language translation of JP ‘456. Note that since the first central axis and second central axis are skewed relative to each other as shown in Figure 5, these axes are not on a same virtual plane, at least to the extent that the claim language is clear in scope and meaning.
With respect to claim 14, JP ‘456 teaches the case 11 has a case body 12, 13, 15 that supports the first guide 25 and the second guide 23, and wherein the first guide 25 or the second guide 23 is rotatable about an axis 24, 26 thereof relative to the case body.
With respect to claim 15, JP ‘456 teaches wherein the case 11 has a case body 12, 13, 15 that supports the first guide 25 and the second guide 23, and wherein the first guide 25 or the second guide 23 is fixed to the case body, as shown in Figure 5.
With respect to claim 16, JP ‘456 teaches the tape 21 does not contact the case between the first guide 25 and the second guide 23, as shown in Figures 5-6.
With respect to claim 17, JP ‘456 teaches the case 12, 13, 15 has a fifth guide 22 arranged between the first guide 25 and the second guide 23 and contacting the tape 21, as shown in Figures 4-6.
With respect to claim 18, JP ‘456 teaches wherein the case 12, 13, 15 has a rectangular outer shape (Fig. 4, 6) when viewed in the first direction, and wherein the first guide 25 and the second guide 23 are respectively arranged at different corner portions of the case (as shown in Figure 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-13 and 19-21 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
With respect to claim 2, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printing cassette having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, wherein the first central axis is inclined to extend away from the axis of the tape roll as approaching the second guide in the first direction.
With respect to claim 3, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printing cassette having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, wherein the second central axis is inclined to extend away from the axis of the tape roll as approaching the first guide in the first direction.
With respect to claim 4, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printing cassette having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, wherein the case further has a third guide configured to guide the tape drawn off the tape roll to alter the second component of the conveying direction, at least a part of the third guide being arranged at the same position as the tape roll in the first direction, wherein the third guide has a third guide surface whose shape is defined by a part of an outer circumferential surface of a virtual third circular column or a virtual third elliptical column each having a third central axis parallel to the first direction, and wherein the first guide is configured to guide the tape guided by the third guide.
With respect to claim 19, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printing cassette having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, further comprising an auxiliary tape roll including an ink ribbon to be used for printing, the ink ribbon being wound, the auxiliary tape roll being arranged at the same position as the second guide in the first direction.
With respect to claim 20, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a printing cassette having all of the structure as recited, in combination with and particularly including, wherein the case has a drawn-out part arranged at the same position as the second guide in the first direction, the tape guided by the second guide being to be drawn out from inside to outside of the case through the drawn-out part.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Iida (JP 62-211180 A) teaches a printing cassette having similarities to the claimed subject matter that are readily apparent.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESLIE J THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2161. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-6:00 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, Stephen D Meier can be reached at 571-272-7149. 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.
/Leslie J Thompson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853