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 § 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 15-28 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 15 recites the limitation "the width direction" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Correction is required.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "the second direction" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lyu et al. US 2004/0195757 (hereinafter “Lyu”, cited in an IDS).
Regarding claim 15, Lyu teaches a printing apparatus ([0062]) comprising:
a loading table (113) configured to be loaded with a printing medium inserted
from an upstream side of the loading table along a conveyance direction;
a feeding roller (131) configured to convey the printing medium on the loading table in a conveyance direction; and
a detection lever (120, 122, refer to FIGS. 3, 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B) configured to
rotate about a rotation axis (axis of 122) extending in the conveyance direction
for detecting a printing medium on the loading table;
a lever flag (121) provided on the detection lever; and
a tip portion (lower most portion of 120) provided on the a leading side of the detection lever and configured to contact the printing medium on the loading table,
in a width direction, a first position (contact position of 120 with a sheet) of a contact between the tip portion and the printing medium and a second position (position of axis of 122) of a center of the rotation axis are different.
Regarding claim 16, a sensor (125) configured to detect the lever flag, wherein the lever flag is located on a top section of the tip portion.
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.
Claims 17 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyu.
Regarding claim 17, Lyu teaches the claimed invention except wherein the conveyance direction includes a first direction in which the printing medium is sent from an upstream side to a downstream side and a second direction opposite to the first direction.
The examiner takes the position that claim requires reverse movement of the sheet. While Lyu does not explicitly teach reverse movement of the sheet, the examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art, before the claimed invention was effectively filed, that paper feeding devices routinely employ sheet separator, provided downstream of a pick roller, in order to reverse a double fed sheet thereby preventing a sheet jam.
Regarding claim 28, Lyu teaches the claimed invention except wherein the printing medium is sent from a conveyance roller in a second direction.
The examiner takes the position that claim requires reverse movement of the sheet. While Lyu does not explicitly teach reverse movement of the sheet, the examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art, before the claimed invention was effectively filed, that paper feeding devices routinely employ sheet separator (conveyance roller), provided downstream of a pick roller, in order to reverse a double fed sheet thereby preventing a sheet jam.
Claims 18-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyu in view of Fuchi US 2009/0057989 A1 (hereinafter "Fuchi").
Regarding claim 18, Lyu teaches the claimed invention except wherein the
detection lever has a first slope surface on an upstream side, which is a source side of
conveyance of the printing medium and in a case where the printing medium is placed
on the loading table, a front edge of the printing medium comes into contact with the
first slope surface.
Fuchi teaches a detection lever having a first slope surface (angled contact
surface of 17, shown in FIG. 3a, 3b, 4, and 8) on an upstream side (according to
embodiment of FIG. 8), which is a source side of conveyance of the printing medium
and in a case where the printing medium is placed on the loading table, a front edge of
the printing medium comes into contact (capable) with the first slope surface. As best
understood, multiple sloped surfaces of the detection lever allows a force to act in a
direction to push the detection lever upward/away even if the paper comes into contact
with the detecting lever from any direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lyu's detection lever with a first slope
surface as taught by Fuchi in order to allow vertical movement of the detection lever
even if a sheet comes into contact with the detecting lever from any direction, thereby
avoiding damage to the sheet or the detection lever.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of references teaches wherein by contact between the front edge of the printing medium and the first slope surface, the detection lever rotates upward (capable).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of references would provide wherein an
angle formed by the first slope surface and the vertical direction is an angle (notice
sloped/inclined surfaces of 17) at which the detection lever is lifted up with a load less
than or equal to a buckling load of the printing medium.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of references would teach wherein the
detection lever (of Fuchi) has a second slope surface (another sloped surface of 17,
opposite to the first slope surface, with reference to embodiment of FIG. 8) on a
Lyu teaches the claimed invention except wherein the printing medium is conveyed in the second direction.
The examiner takes the position that claim requires reverse movement of the sheet. While Lyu does not explicitly teach reverse movement of the sheet, the examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art, before the claimed invention was effectively filed, that paper feeding devices routinely employ sheet separator, provided downstream of a pick roller, in order to reverse a double fed sheet thereby preventing a sheet jam.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of references would teach wherein by
contact between the rear edge of the printing medium and the second slope surface, the
detection lever rotates upward to evacuate in order to allow the sheet to move
upstream.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of references would teach wherein an angle
formed by the second slope surface and the vertical direction is an angle at which the
detection lever is lifted up with a load less than or equal to a buckling load of the printing
medium.
Regarding claim 24, wherein a tip of the tip portion in a case in which the printing medium is not placed on the loading table lands on a position on the loading table lower (refer to opening 115 in FIG. 5B to allow 120 to sink) than that of the tip in a case where the printing medium is placed on the loading table.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyu in view of Ota et al. US 9,592,977 (hereinafter "Ota").
Regarding claim 25, Lyu teaches the claimed invention except a conveyance unit a printhead, carriage and driving source.
Ota teaches a printer that employs a conveyance unit (51), a print head (6), a carriage (61), and a drive source to drive the carriage to reciprocate along the width direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lyu's device with the conveyance unit, a printhead, carriage and drive source of Ota in order to convey a sheet to the printing unit for forming an image on a sheet.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyu in view of Hiraoka US 2004/0041329 A1 (hereinafter “Hiraoka”).
Regarding claim 26, Lyu teaches the claimed invention except wherein the loading table is configured to rotate about another rotation axis along a width direction of the printing medium.
Hiraoka teaches a similar device having a loading table (23) that biased upward and pivotable at an upstream rotation axis (25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lyu's device with another rotation axis for the loading table as taught by Hiraoka as a known alternative arrangement of supporting the loading table to be movable upwards in order to urge a stack to sheet feeding height position.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 27 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS A GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3094. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5:30pm.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at 571-272-7805. 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.
/LUIS A GONZALEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653
Prosecution Insights