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 § 102
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)(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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Yoshida, U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2023/0050444.
The claims provide neither functional nor structural limitations regarding the extent to the claimed “element groups”. Nor do the claims exclude overlap between groups, nor that all of the light-emitting elements must lie within any of the element groups. Moreover, nothing in the claims exclude any particular one of the plural light-emitting elements from being in both a forward order arrangement and a reverse order arrangement with respect to other nearby light-emitting elements. As such, any subset of light-emitting elements of a matrix of light-emitting elements can be “grouped” arbitrarily. Moreover, so long as there are a sufficient number of light-emitting elements in the arbitrarily chosen group, one can always drawn lines between particular light-emitting elements such that neighboring ones are in both a forward order arrangement and a reverse order arrangement with respect to the chosen light-emitting element. Such ambiguity in the claims permits the following rejection, as shown in Yoshida, annotated Fig. 3C:
PNG
media_image1.png
506
610
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1, an exposure device comprising:
a panel member that opposes a photoreceptor and has plural light-emitting elements, wherein the panel member has plural element groups (the two groups shown in boxes), in each of which the plural light- emitting elements are arranged in a main scanning direction along a rotation axis of the photoreceptor (left to right), and
each of the element groups includes:
forward order arrangement in which the plural light-emitting elements are arranged such that positions thereof in a sub-scanning direction orthogonal to the main scanning direction are shifted from one end side to the other end side toward one side in the main scanning direction (choosing the orthogonal direction as from up to down, the “one end side” is up and the “other end side” is down”, and choosing the “one side” as the right side, those elements having arrows from the upper left to the lower right); and
reverse order arrangement in which the plural light-emitting elements are arranged such that positions thereof in the sub-scanning direction are shifted from the other end side to the one end side toward the one side in the main scanning direction (having already chosen the orthogonal direction as from up to down, and the “one side” as the right side, those elements having arrows from the bottom left to the upper right).
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1, wherein each of the element group includes two or more sets of either one of the forward order arrangement and the reverse order arrangement (as depicted).
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 1, wherein an interval L in the sub-scanning direction is set, and the plural light-emitting elements are arranged in m rows, and
a distance between the light-emitting elements, which are adjacent in the main scanning direction, in the sub-scanning direction is less than (m - 1) x L.
This limitation is met whenever “an interval L in the sub-scanning direction is set” as the distance to the Moon from Earth, pointing along the sub-scanning direction.
Regarding claim 4, which depends from claim 1, wherein the plural element groups have common arrangement of the plural light-emitting elements (they are commonly arranged to be on the same side of the substrate, facing the photoconductor).
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 1, an image forming apparatus comprising (fig 1): the exposure device according to claim 1 (supra).
Additionally and alternatively, Examiner assumes arguendo, without conceding, that the claims require that no particular light-emitting element overlap in several claimed arrangements. Even if that were the case, the following similar figure accomplishes that:
PNG
media_image2.png
506
610
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Ijima et al., U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2020/0253022.
Regarding independent claim 1, an exposure device comprising:
a panel member (200) that opposes (fig 2a) a photoreceptor (101) and has plural light-emitting elements, wherein the panel member has plural element groups (each of the diamond shaped groups 320), in each of which the plural light-emitting elements (600) are arranged in a main scanning direction along a rotation axis of the photoreceptor (fig 7, showing their relative arrangement in the main scanning direction), and
each of the element groups includes:
forward order arrangement in which the plural light-emitting elements are arranged such that positions thereof in a sub-scanning direction orthogonal to the main scanning direction are shifted from one end side to the other end side toward one side in the main scanning direction (choosing the orthogonal direction as from down to up as noted in fig. 7, the “one end side” as down and the “other end side” as up”, and choosing the “one side” as the right side, those elements having arrows from the upper left to the lower right, any of the slanted rows parallel to the row at the bottom right or the top left); and
reverse order arrangement in which the plural light-emitting elements are arranged such that positions thereof in the sub-scanning direction are shifted from the other end side to the one end side toward the one side in the main scanning direction (any of the slanted rows parallel to the row at the top right or the bottom left).
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1, wherein each of the element group includes two or more sets of either one of the forward order arrangement and the reverse order arrangement (fig 7).
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 1, wherein an interval L in the sub-scanning direction is set, and the plural light-emitting elements are arranged in m rows, and
a distance between the light-emitting elements, which are adjacent in the main scanning direction, in the sub-scanning direction is less than (m - 1) x L.
This limitation is met whenever “an interval L in the sub-scanning direction is set” as the distance to the Moon from Earth, pointing along the sub-scanning direction.
Regarding claim 4, which depends from claim 1, wherein the plural element groups have common arrangement of the plural light-emitting elements (fig 7, they are commonly arranged to face the photoconductor).
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 1, an image forming apparatus (fig 1) comprising: the exposure device according to claim 1 (supra).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art teaches that the interval between light emitting elements is a result effective variable that affects the print resolution: Yoshida et al., U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2021/0055669; Masuda, U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2013/0243446; and, Miyazawa, U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2008/0080898. Yoshida, U.S. Pat. No. 6,094,254, teaches placing light emitting elements askew with respect to one another to compensate for distortions is the lenses that such light will pass through. Haruhiko, JP 2013-101252, teaches placing light emitting elements at different angles to prevent moire.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEVAN A AYDIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3209. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-6PM PT.
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 at (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 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.
/SEVAN A AYDIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights