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 “the developing unit includes a developing chamber provided with the developing member and the supplying member, and a toner accommodating chamber in which the toner supplied to the developing chamber is accommodated, wherein the toner accommodating chamber is configured to be supplied with the toner, and wherein in a case in which the toner accommodating chamber is supplied with the toner” of claims 16-18 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Currently, the drawings do not show an embodiment where the toner accommodating chamber is ‘configured to be supplied with the toner’. If by the phrasing “configured to be supplied with”, the applicant intends the phrase to convey ‘contains toner therein’, this claim phrasing may fail to further limit or be improperly phrased since “configured to be supplied with” implies a definitive action of supplying toner to the chamber. 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 title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-18 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: a structure, means or method for acquiring “toner amount information” of the toner in the developing unit.
Similarly, claims 9 and 12 also omit elements which are: a structure, means or method for acquiring “toner amount information” of the toner in the developing unit.
Claims 3 and 4 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.
It is unclear what is meant by a “normal polarity side of the toner”. Further, the whole claim is generally convoluted and must be rewritten for clarity. The Office is unable to ascertain the metes and bounds of the claims.
Claims 6 and 7 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.
Claim 2, upon which claim 6 depends, sets a distinct from-until constraint on the claim language. Claim 6 then goes on to state that the operation is performed based on the time from a stop in a previous job to the time of start for the current job. It is unclear in which manner it is “based on”. It is unclear if the resulting decision is between perform preliminary operation or not perform preliminary operation. If this is the case, it is unclear how this further limits claim 2 which states that the preliminary operation is performed in this period from input to first rotation. It is also unclear if claim6 is intending to change the period during which the preliminary operation is performed and thus it is unclear if claim 6 fails to further limit claim 2 in this interpretation.
Claim 7 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.
It is unclear how the time indicated can be both a first time and a second time. It is unclear how the two interplay. It is possible that the claim may be intending to declare that the time indicated can be one of a first time or a second time longer than the first time, but if this is the case, the language is not clear. As such, the Office cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim.
Claim 9 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.
It is unclear how the toner amount indicated can be both a first toner amount and a second toner amount. It is unclear how the two interplay. It is possible that the claim may be intending to declare that the amount indicated can be one of a first amount or a second amount larger than the first amount, but if this is the case, the language is not clear. As such, the Office cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim.
Claims 10-12 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.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: a structure, means or method for acquiring “deterioration degree information” of the toner in the developing unit.
Claim 11 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.
It is unclear how the deterioration degree indicated can be both a first deterioration degree and a second deterioration degree. It is unclear how the two interplay. It is possible that the claim may be intending to declare that the deterioration degree indicated can be one of a first deterioration degree or a second deterioration degree further progressed than the first deterioration degree, but if this is the case, the language is not clear. As such, the Office cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim.
Claims 13-15 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.
Lines 1-4 of claim 13 set forth that the “developing unit includes…a toner accommodating chamber”. Lines 5-7 then introduce that “a toner cartridge provided with the toner accommodating chamber” and is mountable and dismountable from a developing container provided with the developing chamber.
It is unclear: 1) to which unit the accommodating chamber belongs; and 2) how the developing container is related to the developing unit as they both comprise the developing chamber.
Claim 13 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: claim 13 also introduces a variety of “toner amount information” and a variety of “deteriorating degree information”, but omits a structure, means or method for acquiring these pieces of information.
Claims 14-15 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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: a structure, means or method for acquiring “rotation time” of the developing member after exchange.
Claim 15 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.
It is unclear how the rotation time indicated can be both a first rotation time and a second rotation time. It is unclear how the two interplay. It is possible that the claim may be intending to declare that the rotation time indicated can be one of a first rotation time or a second rotation time, but if this is the case, the language is not clear. As such, the Office cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim.
Claims 16-18 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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: a structure, means or method for acquiring the variety of “toner amount information” and the variety of “deteriorating degree information that the claim recites.
Claims 17-18 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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: a structure, means or method for acquiring “rotation time” of the developing member after exchange.
Claim 18 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.
It is unclear how the rotation time indicated can be both a first rotation time and a second rotation time. It is unclear how the two interplay. It is possible that the claim may be intending to declare that the rotation time indicated can be one of a first rotation time or a second rotation time, but if this is the case, the language is not clear. As such, the Office cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
While no art rejection has been presented, it is impossible to state what the allowable subject matter may be before amendments to resolve the issues presented under 35 U.S.C. 112.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the overarching combination of a control portion configured to control the developing voltage applying portion and the supplying voltage applying portion… in a state in which the developing member and the supplying member rotate… perform a preliminary operation in which a first potential difference and a second potential difference different from the first potential difference are formed between the developing member and the supplying member and alternately switched for a plurality of number of times based on toner amount information regarding a toner amount in the developing unit appears as though it may be allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamamoto et al. (US Pub.2011/0229175) discloses measuring a remaining amount of toner by detecting voltage between a developing roller & a supply roller.
Kawamura (US Pub.2011/0085807) disclose a means of measuring remaining toner amount using the capacity between the supply and developing roller.
Hayashi et al. (US Pub.2015/0261122) disclose a developing roller and supplying member bias control with a potential difference switching during the pre-rotation and inter-image periods; however, the switching is not effected as based on a toner amount information.
Bray et al. (US Pub.2011/0280606) discusses the packing of toner between a donor and developing roller, adjusting the roller speed to address this and discloses that the operation can be made during non-printing periods; however, the control is not based on toner amount information or effected by adjusting a potential difference between rollers.
Hagiwara et al. (US Pub.2005/0196201) discloses using a superimposed AC voltage on a DC to suppress leakage and prevent non-uniformity of image due to toner agglomeration on a developing roller, but does not teach switching the potential difference based on remaining toner amount and during a pre-image forming period.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA K ROTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2154. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30AM-3:30 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.
/LKR/
6/23/2026
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights