DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 17, 2025 has been entered.
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 33, 46, and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikeda et al. [US 2012/0164585].
For claim 33, Ikeda teaches a light source (4 and L1-Ln, see Fig. 1) for exposing a printing plate having a mask layer selectively ablated with a laser beam (the light source 4 can be used for any photocuring process, including a process comprising a printing plate having a mask layer selectively ablated with a laser beam; this limitation does not structurally alter the claimed light source), the light source comprising a plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (see [0063] and Figs. 1 and 2) arranged in an array coextensive with a first dimension (along Y direction, see Fig. 2) and a controller (40) configured to control light intensity of independently controllable subsets of the plurality of LEDs (groups, see [0066], [0073], [0095]-[0099], and Figs. 8 and 9), the light source and controller configured to cause the light source to emit different light intensities simultaneously from at least a first section (first group GR) comprising a first subset of the plurality of LEDs positioned in a first portion of the first dimension, and at least a second section (second group GR) comprising a second subset of the plurality of LEDs positioned in a second portion of the first dimension (different illuminance setting along Y direction for each group, see Figs. 6, 8, 9, and 12), wherein the mask layer defines imaging data applied to each of the first section and the second portion, the imaging data defining a predetermined test pattern including dots having a spacing therebetween (the light source 4 is capable of use in any photocuring process, including a process comprising a printing plate having a mask layer selectively ablated with a laser beam; this limitation does not structurally alter the claimed light source), and the light source and controller configured to cause the light source to provide one or more coordinated front and back exposure cycles, in which each cycle comprises (a) commencing irradiation of a back, non-printing side of the printing plate and (b) commencing irradiation over at least one of the first portion and the second portion (the light source 4 is functionally capable of exposing two sides of a substrate by first exposing a first side of the substrate, flipping the substrate, and then exposing the back side of the substrate).
For claim 46, Ikeda teaches the predetermined test pattern defines variations in dot size and spacing between dots (the light source 4 is capable of use in any photocuring process, including a process comprising a printing plate having a mask layer selectively ablated with a laser beam; this limitation does not structurally alter the claimed light source, but instead describes what the light source can act upon).
For claim 47, Ikeda teaches the variations in dot size and spacing are defined by a plurality of different sized pixel clusters located a plurality of different distances to one another (the light source 4 is capable of use in any photocuring process, including a process comprising a printing plate having a mask layer selectively ablated with a laser beam; this limitation does not structurally alter the claimed light source, but instead describes what the light source can act upon).
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 1, 4-6, 9, 10-12, 15-17, 34-38, 40, 41, 48, and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klein et al. [US 2012/0266767] in view of Ikeda et al. [US 2012/0164585] and Wolterink et al. [US 2018/0210345].
For claims 1, 12, and 34, Klein teaches a system and corresponding method comprising:
a printing plate (plate, see Figs. 1-3 and 8-9) having:
a front, printing side of photopolymer printing plate material (see [0026]) located within a target area of the printing plate (exposing the plate by LED array, see [0061] and Fig. 8), the target area being defined by a first dimension and second dimension (arrangement of the plate in a two dimensional space, see Figs. 1-3 and 8-9) and comprising a plurality of portions along the first dimension or the second dimension (areas on the plate where round tops are provided and different areas on the plate where flat tops are provided by adjusting the intensity light provided, see [0034]-[0037], [0040], [0096]-[0108]),
a mask (film mask for forming mask image using ablateable material, see Figs. 2 and 3 and [0141]) for defining imaging data to be transferred to the printing plate, wherein the imaging data applied to each of the plurality of portions defines a predetermined test pattern comprising dots having a spacing therebetween (dots and spacing shown in Figs. 2 and 3 and dots described [0030]-[0034]),
and a back, non-printing side (back side of the plate not exposed);
a light source comprising a plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) arranged in an array coextensive with the first dimension of the target area (the illumination unit extends to cover one dimension of the plate, see Fig. 8 and [0079]);
means for causing relative movement between the light source and the target area in a path along the second dimension in one or more passes (see [0039] and Figs. 5 and 8),
a control system (see Figs. 5 and 8) configured to cause the light source to emit different light intensities over corresponding the plurality of portions of the target area in along at least one of the first dimension or the second dimension such that the portions of the target area receive correspondingly different amounts of radiation (changing rotation speed or effective irradiance can be altered by changing the UV power level at different areas, see [0072], [0077]-[0078], and [0096]-[0108]).
Klein fails to teach the array having at least two sections, a first section comprising a first subset of the plurality of LEDs over a first portion of the first dimension, and a second section comprising a second subset of the plurality of LEDs over a second portion of the first dimension; a control system including at least one of: a configuration in which the first section emits a first light intensity over the first portion of the first dimension and the second section emits a second light intensity over the second portion of the first dimension simultaneously, the second light intensity being different than the first light intensity simultaneously; and a configuration in which at least one of the first section or the second section emits a first light intensity over a first portion of the second dimension of the target area and a second light intensity over a second portion of the second dimension of the target area as one of the light source and the target area travels in the path along the second dimension during a single pass.
Ikeda teaches an exposure method (see [0055] and [0085]-[0118]) and apparatus (see Fig. 1 and 2) comprising an LED array (4 and L1-Ln, see [0063]) having at least two sections, a first section comprising a first subset of the plurality of LEDs over a first portion of the first dimension (first group GR, see [0066], [0073], [0095]-[0099], and Figs. 8 and 9), and a second section comprising a second subset of the plurality of LEDs over a second portion of the first dimension (second group GR);
a control system (see Fig. 1) configured to cause the light source to emit different light intensities over corresponding the plurality of portions of the target area in along at least one of the first dimension or the second dimension such that the portions of the target area receive correspondingly different amounts of radiation (different light emission illuminance, see [0085]-[0100] and Figs. 6-9 and 12-13) including at least one of:
a configuration in which the first section emits a first light intensity over the first portion of the first dimension and the second section emits a second light intensity over the second portion of the first dimension simultaneously, the second light intensity being different than the first light intensity simultaneously (different illuminance setting along Y direction and movement in X direction, see Figs. 6, 8, 9, and 12); and
a configuration in which at least one of the first section or the second section emits a first light intensity over a first portion of the second dimension of the target area and a second light intensity over a second portion of the second dimension of the target area as one of the light source and the target area travels in the path along the second dimension during a single pass (different illuminance setting along X direction during movement in X direction, see Figs. 6, 8, 9, and 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the LED array with control as taught by Ikeda in the LED array and control as taught by Klein in order to provide desired dose to each portion to reduce the need for multiple overlapping passes of the same portion and thereby increase throughput.
Klein fails to teach the control system is configured to cause the light source to provide one or more coordinated front and back exposure cycles, in which each cycle comprises (a) commencing irradiation of the back, non-printing side of the printing plate and (b) commencing irradiation over the plurality of portions of the target area along at least one of the first dimension or the second dimension.
Wolterink teaches the control system is configured to cause the light source to provide one or more coordinated front and back exposure cycles, in which each cycle comprises (a) commencing irradiation of the back, non-printing side of the printing plate and (b) commencing irradiation over the plurality of portions of the target area along at least one of the first dimension or the second dimension (front source 110 and back source 120 configured as an array of individually controllable LED point source that irradiate the back portion and front portion of the plate 130, see Figs. 1A, 11 and 12 and [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the backside exposure as taught by Wolterink in the light source control as taught by Klein in order to provide for adjusting the shape of the printed pattern element to provide a desired shape for a desired purpose, such as pattern element stability, dot size, or pattern density.
For claims 4 and 15, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Ikeda teaches the control system is configured to cause the change between the first light intensity and the second light intensity to be a stepwise change (whole number changes in illuminance, see Figs. 6, 8, 9, 12, and 13).
For claims 5 and 16, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Klein teaches performing multiple passes of relative movement along the second dimension (circumferential direction, see Fig. 8 and [0096]-[0108]) and Ikeda teaches the control system is configured to cause multiple exposure steps and to cause no light to be emitted by at least a portion of the light source over at least a portion of at least one exposure step (zero illuminance, see [0094]-[0095] and Figs. 8 and 9), wherein no light is emitted by at least a portion of the light source over at least a portion of at least one pass (zero illuminance, see [0094]-[0095] and Figs. 8 and 9).
For claims 6 and 17, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Klein teaches the photopolymer printing plate material located within the target area (see [0026]) comprises a plurality of patches of plate material, including at least two patches having different plate characteristics (areas on the plate where round tops are provided and different areas on the plate where flat tops are provided by adjusting the intensity light provided, see [0034]-[0037], [0040], [0096]-[0108]) and Ikeda teaches a plurality of patches of plate material, including at least two patches having different plate characteristics (a predetermined region where the resist film thickness is desired to be left larger, see [0055]).
For claim 9, Klein teaches the light source is stationary and the target area comprises a cylinder having a width in the first dimension and a circumferential area in the second dimension, and the cylinder is configured to rotate beneath the light source to cause the relative movement (see Figs. 8 and [0072]).
For claims 10 and 40, Klein teaches the target area is stationary (see Fig. 6) and the light source comprises a linear source having a linear dimension coextensive with the first dimension (see [0079] and [0080], where the UV exposure unit of Sievers [US 2009/0294696] incorporated by reference), a width less than the second dimension, and the linear source is mounted to a carriage configured to move in the second dimension to cause the relative movement (see Fig. 16 and [0080] of the incorporated reference Sievers).
For claims 11 and 41, Klein fails to teach the plurality of LEDs comprise a plurality of stationary light sources arrayed across and coextensive with an entirety of the first dimension and the second dimension of a stationary target area, and the means for causing relative movement between the light source and the target area comprises a configuration of the controller adapted to activate and deactivate different portions of the array such that activated portions move across the array over time.
Wolterink the plurality of LEDs comprise a plurality of stationary light sources arrayed across and coextensive with entirety of the first dimension and the second dimension of a stationary target area (see Fig. 8 and [0049]), and the means for causing relative movement between the light source and the target area comprises a configuration of the controller adapted to activate and deactivate different portions of the array such that activated portions move across the array over time (activate the radiation subsources in a sequence that causes relative motion between the radiation field and the plate, see [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the relative motion as taught by Wolterink in the relative motion means as taught by Klein because there would be no moving parts to introduce pattern error due to vibration.
For claim 35, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Ikeda teaches the array comprises a third section comprising a third subset of the plurality of LEDs over a third portion of the first dimension (third group GR, see Figs. 6, 8, 9, 12, and 13).
For claim 36, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Ikeda teaches the control system causes the light source to emit different light intensities over the plurality of portions of the target area in a configuration in which at least one of the first section, the second section, and the third section emits the first light intensity over the first portion of the second dimension of the target area, the second light intensity over the second portion of the second dimension of the target area, and the third light intensity over a third portion of the second dimension of the target area, as the relative movement between the light source and the target area travels in the path along the second dimension during a single pass (three groups of LEDs that change illuminance along the X and Y direction during movement in the Y direction, see Figs. 8, 9, 12, and 13).
For claim 37, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Ikeda teaches the control system causes the light source to emit different light intensities over the plurality of portions of the target area in a configuration in which the first section emits a first light intensity over the first portion of the first dimension, the second section emits a second light intensity over the second portion of the first dimension, and the third section emits a third light intensity over the third portion of the first dimension (three groups of LEDs that change illuminance along the X and Y direction during movement in the Y direction, see Figs. 8, 9, 12, and 13).
For claim 38, in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Ikeda teaches the target area receives different amounts of total energy exposure across the plurality of portions during a single pass (three groups of LEDs that change illuminance along the X and Y direction during movement in the Y direction, see Figs. 8, 9, 12, and 13).
For claim 48, in the combination of Klein and Wolterink, Wolterink teaches the one or more coordinated front and back exposure cycles comprises a quantity of one or more exposure steps of the back, non-printing side of the printing plate (irradiance of the back side ratio relative the front side exposure, see [0033]), a quantity of one or more exposure steps of the plurality of portions of the target area along at least one of the first dimension or the second dimension (irradiance of the main side, see [0033]), speed of the means for causing relative movement between the light source and the target area (speed of the carriage, see [0033] and [0034]), or a combination thereof.
For claim 49, in the combination of Klein and Wolterink, Wolterink teaches the control system is configured to cause the light source to commence irradiation of the back, non-printing side of the printing plate, and the front side simultaneously, (the illumination pattern may be configured to illuminate multiple portions of the front and back simultaneously (e.g. such as in a pattern that mimics multiple carriages—one starting at one end of the plate, and one starting in the middle, see [0050]) and in the combination of Klein and Ikeda, Ikeda teaches the first section of the array to emit the first light intensity over the first portion of the first dimension, the second section of the array to emit the second light intensity over the second portion of the first dimension (different light emission illuminance, see [0085]-[0100] and Figs. 6-9 and 12-13).
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klein in view of Ikeda and Wolterink as applied to claims 6 and 17 above, and further in view of Chow et al. [US 4,474,864].
For claims 7 and 18, Klein fails to teach the different plate characteristics comprise different types of photopolymer material.
Chow teaches that different plate characteristics comprise different types of photopolymer material (the photoresist material is polymerized, to expose resists of different chemical composition, see col. 1 lines 15-18 and col 4 lines 3-10).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to test different composition dose response as taught by Chow in the in the area of the plate as taught by Klein, because testing the different compositions would allow for determining the optimum compositions/dosage combination for a particular machine.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klein in view of Ikeda and Wolterink as applied to claims 6 and 17 above, and further in view of Cao et al. [WO 2014/127582].
For claims 8 and 19, Klein teaches the photopolymer printing plate material located within the target area (see [0026]), but fails to teach the different plate characteristics comprise different thicknesses of a same photopolymer material.
Cao teaches the target area comprises a plurality of patches of plate material, including different plate characteristics comprise different thicknesses of a same resist material (Step 201: forming a plurality of photoresist regions of different film thickness on one substrate, see page 4 of the translation).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to test different thicknesses of photosensitive material as taught by Cao in the exposure as taught by Klein in order to determine the optimum thickness relative the exposure dosage amount using a single plate to reduce testing time (see beneficial effects on page 3 of the translation of Cao).
Claims 42-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klein in view of Ikeda and Wolterink as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Samworth [US 6,310,698].
For claims 42-45, Klein fails to teach the predetermined test pattern defines variations in dot size and spacing between dots, wherein the variations in dot size and spacing are defined by a plurality of different sized pixel clusters located a plurality of different distances to one another.
Samworth teaches a predetermined test pattern defines variations in dot size and spacing between dots (generating a test target having different size with the same pitch, thus different spacings for edge to edge, see Fig. 2 and col. 6 line 60 – col. 7 line 7), wherein the variations in dot size and spacing are defined by a plurality of different sized pixel clusters located a plurality of different distances to one another (dots are made up of an aggregation pixels, see col. 5 lines 35-53).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide halftone test patterns as taught by Samworth in the printing plate as taught by Klein in order to calibrate the dot size of the halftone pattern to the imaged pattern to ensure accurate imaging.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 17, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues on page 15 of the Remarks, regarding independent claims 1, 11 and 33, that Wolterink does not teaches the specific configuration of the coordinated front and back exposure cycle as recited in claim 1, nor provide a motivation to a motivation for one skilled in the art to modify the combination of Klein and Ikeda in order to arrive at the claimed invention, without impermissible hindsight based on the present invention.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Wolterink teaches in Figs. 1A, 11 and 12 and paragraph [0033]-[0037] a synchronized irradiation to a front and back side of the plate using individually controllable LED arrays that extend along a first direction of the plate and that move relative to the plate in second orthogonal direction along the surface of the plate. Paragraph [0045] of Wolterink teaches the synchronized backside exposure allows for providing increased stability or smaller size to the dot element of the patterned plate. Klein teaches in [0116]-[0117] the desire to provide different shaped structures to different areas of the same plate to print different pattern types. The combination of Klein, Ikeda, and Wolterink provides for the predictable result of forming a variety of shapes of printing elements on a single plate as desired by Klein. Further, an impermissible hindsight reasoning argument is directed to the combination and not the anticipation described in the prior art rejection of claim 33.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wattyn [US 2023/064466] teaches in Figs. 1-4, 7, and 11 a frontside and backside exposure of the printing plate at different intensities and Sievers [US 2019/0224958] teaches in [0061] and claim 34 a controller to cause one set of LEDs to have a different intensity than another set of LEDs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven H Whitesell whose telephone number is (571)270-3942. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM (MST).
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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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.
/Steven H Whitesell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759