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.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 5/9/2025 are acceptable for examination by the examiner.
Title
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.
Examiner’s Comment
Please be advised that a terminal disclaimer make be needed upon allowance of this application although a double patenting rejection was not applied. Important information is attached below.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MOCHIZUKI et al. (US 2017/0075266 A1; hereinafter MOCHIZUKI).
MOCHIZUKI teaches regarding claim 1, a fixing device (shown in figure 2) that fixes a toner image formed on a recording material to the recording material by heat, the fixing device comprising: a film having a cylindrical shape; a heater in an internal space of the film, the heater including a substrate, and a plurality of heat generating blocks BLb-1-3 located on the substrate and arranged in a longitudinal direction of the heater 300; a plurality of power supply terminals in contact with electrodes of the respective plurality of heat generating blocks; and a plurality of power supply cables connected to the respective plurality of power supply terminals, wherein each of the plurality of power supply terminals includes a contact portion in contact with the electrode and a connection portion connected to the power supply cable (shown in figure 5A-5C, dotted line), wherein the plurality of heat generating blocks includes a first heat generating block and a second heat generating block next to each other in the longitudinal direction, wherein the plurality of power supply terminals includes a first power supply terminal in contact with the first heat generating block and a second power supply terminal in contact with the second heat generating block, the first power supply terminal and the second power supply terminal being located in the internal space of the film 202, wherein the connection portion of the first power supply terminal is at a position closer to one end portion of the heater in the longitudinal direction than the contact portion of the first power supply terminal, and the connection portion of the second power supply terminal is at a position closer to the other end portion of the heater in the longitudinal direction than the contact portion of the second power supply terminal, wherein the power supply cable connected to the connection portion of the first power supply terminal extends toward the one end portion of the heater (figures 2, 5A-5C; [0086]).
However, MOCHIZUKI does not teach the power supply cable connected to the connection portion of the second power supply terminal is bent from extending toward the other end portion of the heater to extend toward the one end portion of the heater.
MOCHIZUKI does not teach any detailed information about the power supply cables.
ENDO teaches the use of power supply cables to connect the temperature detectors that are adjacent to heating blocks in the heating device within a fixing device to power supply (figures 4 and 6). The cables are bent as needed to accomplish power feeding [0096, 0100]. This teaching can be used for supplying power to the heating blocks since they are similarity located. Further, if this teaching were applied to Mochizuki dotted line cables, the number of cables outside the film would be an even and odd number based on its figure 5A.
MOCHIZUKI and ENDO are concerned with control of the heat of a fixing device. ENDO’s teaching can be used for supplying power to the heating blocks since they are similarity located and require power supply.
The rationale for combining the teachings of ENDO with the teachings of MOCHIZUKI relates to the rationale of using a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to use the teaching of ENDO with the teaching of MOCHIZUKI to better align power supply cables to the fixing device.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANA GRAINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-2135. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9-5.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached on 571-272-1674. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QUANA GRAINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
QG
Prosecution Insights