Ex parte BARES et al. - Page 2




               Appeal No. 96-2878                                                                                                      
               Application 08/313,631                                                                                                  


               through 23 and 29 through 33, all of the claims pending in the present application.                                     

                      The invention relates to an electrophotographic printer and increasing the useable capacity of                  

               the cleaner sump.  In particular, referring to Figure 1, cleaner sump 30 is adjacent to the photoreceptor               

               drum 10.  A cleaning blade 20 contacts the imaging surface 11 of drum 10, and waste magnetic toner                      

               70 falls via gravity into sump 30.  Appellants have increased the useable capacity of sump 30 by placing                

               magnet 40 in an area removed from the cleaning blade 20.  Magnet 40 attracts toner further away from                    

               blade 20 than gravity would have provided, thus more sump 30 space is utilized.  In an alternative                      

               embodiment, Appellants move waste toner 70 via a rotating magnet 60 as depicted in Figure 4.                            

                       Representative independent claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                                                    

                       1.  An apparatus for cleaning magnetic material from a surface, comprising:                                     

                       a housing defining a chamber for storing magnetic material removed from the surface with the                    
               chamber having under utilized areas for storing magnetic material; and                                                  

                       a magnet positioned to attract and move the magnetic material into the under utilized areas for                 
               tighter packing of the magnetic material stored in the chamber of said housing, increasing storage                      
               capacity of the chamber of said housing.                                                                                

                       The Examiner relies on the following references:                                                                

               Schnall et al. (Schnall)        4,251,155                       Feb. 17, 1981                                           
               Yamashita et al. (Yamashita)            4,496,240                       Jan. 29, 1985                                   

                      Claims 1 through 5, 11 through 15, 19 through 23 and 29 through 33 stand rejected under 35                      

               U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Schnall in view of Yamashita.                                                   


                                                                  2                                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007