Appeal No. 2000-0703
Application No. 08/490,268
selectively energizing ink ejection elements in
said printhead during said one or more second scans of
said printhead across said recording medium to cause
said certain ones of said ink ejection elements to be
used less frequently than in said one or more first
scans, and to cause said other ink ejection elements to
be used more frequently than in said one or more first
scans so as to achieve more uniform wear of all ink
ejection elements and nozzles in said printhead.
The examiner relies upon the following reference:
Admitted Prior art.
Claims 1 through 6, 8, 10, 13 through 20 and 24 through 26
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph for lack of
written description.
Claims 1 through 6, 8, 10, 13 through 20 and 24 through 26
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph for lack of
enablement.
Claims 1 through 6, 8, 10, 13 through 20 and 24 through 26
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by the
Admitted Prior art.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants and the
examiner, we make reference to the brief (paper no. 24, filed
February 16, 1999), the reply brief (paper no. 26, filed June 7,
1999) and the answer (paper no. 25, filed April 26, 1999) for the
respective details thereof.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007