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
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.
Claim(s) 1–4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taniguchi (US Pub. # 20220171312).
Regarding claim 1, Taniguchi teaches, “An image forming apparatus (Fig. 1, 2, 3) comprising: an image forming portion (between ref. # 8 and 9) that forms an image on a recording medium (P); a sheet feeding portion (12) that feeds the recording medium to the image forming portion; a discharge portion (18) that discharges the recording medium having the image formed thereon in the image forming portion; a sheet conveyance passage (area between 12, 8/9, 18) that connects together the image forming portion, the sheet feeding portion, and the discharge portion; a branch conveyance passage (area into 21 branching away from area between 12, 8/9, and 18) that branches off the sheet conveyance passage; a conveyance guide (35) that forms part of a conveyance surface of the sheet conveyance passage at an intersection between the sheet conveyance passage and the branch conveyance passage (35 forms part of a conveyance surface at an intersection between 12, 8/9, 18 and area into 21; see para. [0024–0033]); and a pair of assist rollers (13a, 13b) that conveys the recording medium along the sheet conveyance passage, wherein the conveyance guide (35) is supported so as to be swingable about a swing axis (35a) in a direction in which the conveyance guide retracts from the conveyance surface of the sheet conveyance passage, and one (13a on 35; see Fig. 3 of the pair of assist rollers is fixed to a shaft (13a on shaft, ref. # not labeled) extending parallel to the swing axis (13a and 35a extend parallel to each other; see Fig. 2, 3) and is rotatably supported on the conveyance guide (13a rotatably supported on 35).”
Regarding claim 2, Taniguchi teaches, “wherein the shaft extends over an entire width of the conveyance guide along an axial direction of the swing axis (see Fig. 3; shaft holding 13a, extending over entire width of 35 along axial direction of 35a).”
Regarding claim 3, Taniguchi teaches, “wherein one of the pair of assist rollers is located in a middle part of the conveyance guide along an axial direction of the swing axis (see Fig. 3, ref. # 13a in middle of 35 along axial direction of 35a).”
Regarding claim 4, Taniguchi teaches, “wherein the swing axis and a center of gravity of the conveyance guide are set so as to produce a moment that makes the conveyance guide swing under an own weight thereof in a direction in which the conveyance guide retracts from the conveyance surface of the sheet conveyance passage (35a and cog of 35 are set to produce a moment that makes 35 swing under its own weight in a direction in which 35 retracts; see Fig. 2, 3 and para. [0027–0033]).”
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.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taniguchi (US Pub. # 20220171312) in view of Tokunaga et al. (CN 102023535 A), hereinafter referred to as Tokunaga.
Regarding claim 5, Taniguchi does not appear to teach, “wherein in a section orthogonal to the swing axis, rotary shafts of the pair of assist rollers and the swing axis are aligned on a straight line.” However, Tokunaga teaches rotary shafts of a pair of assist rollers (Fig. 2, 3; interpreted here as shafts of ref. # 5D in contact with roller 71) and a swing axis (722 of 72) aligned on a straight line (see positioning of 5D, 71, 722 and shafts thereof in Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Taniguchi’s invention to include wherein in a section orthogonal to the swing axis, rotary shafts of the pair of assist rollers and the swing axis are aligned on a straight line.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Taniguchi’s invention for at least the purpose of ensuring adequate and proper pressure between conveyance members when pressed against each other, while allowing ease of separation when clearing a paper jam or for maintenance purposes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO–892 form. The references cited herewith teach image forming apparatuses with conveyance members having configurations similar to the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2726. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, 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.
/RYAN D WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights