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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/12/2025 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claims 3 and 8 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Here, claims 3 and 8 encompass the same subject matter and are duplicate claims.
Response to Amendments
In response to the amendment received on 11/12/2025:
• Claims 1-8 are currently pending. Claims 6-7 are withdrawn for being directed to a non-elected invention(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wickramanayke et al. (US-5302197-A) (hereinafter referred to as “Wickramanayke”) in view of Yamazaki et al. (US-20130281593-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Yamazaki”), with evidence from Fukuda (US-20240059916-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Fukuda”) as to the rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 only.
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Wickramanayke teaches an aqueous ink jet ink composition (see Wickramanayke at col. 2, lines 45-68, teaching an inkjet ink comprising an aqueous carrier medium) comprising:
• a color material, water, a polyhydric alcohol having a standard boiling point of 270 °C or more, and 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone, wherein the color material is a pigment (claim 4) (see Wickramanayke at col. 2, lines 45-68 and col. 3, lines 26, teaching the ink as containing a pigment, an aqueous carrier medium, and a cosolvent combination comprising a polyol/alkylene oxide condensate and a cyclic amide derivative; also see Wickramanayke at col. 5, lines 50-55, showing the structure of the polyol/alkylene oxide condensate as being a polyhydric alcohol (the structure contains multiple hydroxyl groups); also see Wickramanayke at col. 6, lines 15-26, teaching Liponic EG-1 as a suitable polyol/alkylene oxide condensate; Liponic EG-1 has a boiling point of 381 °C, as evidenced by Fukuda at para. 0201; also see Wickramanayke at col. 7, lines 23-30, teaching 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone as a suitable cyclic amide derivative); wherein
• a mass ratio of the content of the polyhydric alcohol to that of 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone is 6.5 or more and 7.0 or less (see Wickramanayke at col. 7, lines 40-49, teaching the ratio of the polyol/alkylene oxide condensate and the cyclic amide solvent to range from 1:10 to 10:1, or a range from 0.1 to 10; this range of 0.1 to 10 overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05).
While Wickramanayke teaches the ink composition outlined above, Wickramanayke fails to explicitly teach the ink as comprising trimethyl glycine.
However, Yamazaki teaches an aqueous ink jet ink containing a pigment (see Yamazaki at para. 0011 and 0076). Yamazaki further teaches the ink may include an amphoteric ion compound, and that by including the amphoteric ion compound, it is possible to more effectively suppress unevenness of image concentration and achieve more excellent glossiness of a recorded image (see Yamazaki at para. 0071). Moreover, Yamazaki teaches trimethyl glycine is more preferable as the amphoteric ion compound from a viewpoint of reliably reducing expansion speed of the recording medium after printing and preventing clogging of an ink ejecting nozzle (see Yamazaki at para. 0072).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add trimethyl glycine to the aqueous inkjet ink of Wickramanayke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to effectively suppress unevenness of image concentration, achieve more excellent glossiness of a recorded image, reliably reduce expansion speed of the recording medium after printing, and/or prevent clogging of an ink ejecting nozzle (see Yamazaki at para. 0071-0072).
Regarding claim 2, see Wickramanayke at col. 6, lines 46-59, teaching the content of the polyol/alkylene oxide condensate to range from 5 to 25% in the ink, which overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 5, see Wickramanayke at col. 9, lines 24-26, teaching the example inks as being loaded in an ink reservoir of thermal ink jet pens; moreover, it is noted that the claimed limitation is a recitation of intended use; since the structure of the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim, the same is considered capable of meeting the limitation, see MPEP § 2111.
Claims 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howald (EP-1277810-A1), with reference to the included machine translation (hereinafter referred to as “Howald”), in view of Yamazaki, with evidence from Fukuda as to the rejection of claims 1-5 and 8.
Regarding claims 1, 3, 4 and 8, Howald teaches an aqueous ink jet ink composition (see Howald at pg. 1, para. 1 and pg. 2, para. 6) comprising:
• a color material, water, a polyhydric alcohol having a standard boiling point of 270 °C or more (304 °C or less, regarding claims 3 and 8), and 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone, wherein the color material is a pigment (claim 4) (see Howald at pg. 2, para. 6, teaching the ink as containing a pyrrolidone derivative, a polyhydric alcohol, a pigment, and water; also see Howald at pg. 2, para. 6, teaching N-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone (i.e., 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone) as a suitable pyrrolidone derivative; also see Howald at pg. 3, para. 2, teaching glycerin as a suitable polyhydric alcohol; glycerin has a boiling point of 290 °C, as evidenced by Fukuda at para. 0122); wherein
• a mass ratio of the content of the polyhydric alcohol to that of 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone is 6.5 or more and 7.0 or less (see Howald at pg. 2, para. 6, teaching the ink as containing 6 to 25 wt% of polyhydric alcohol, i.e., glycerin; also see Howald at pg. 2, para. 6, teaching the ink as containing 2.5 to 20 wt% of a pyrrolidone derivative, i.e., 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone; thus, Howald necessarily teaches a ratio of a content of the polyhydric alcohol (i.e., glycerin) to that of the pyrrolidone derivative (i.e., 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone) of 0.3 to 10 (6% glycerin minimum/20% pyrrolidone maximum = 0.3 ratio minimum; 25% glycerin maximum/2.5% pyrrolidone minimum = 10 ratio maximum); this range of 0.3 to 10 overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05).
While Howald teaches the ink composition outlined above, Howald fails to explicitly teach the ink as comprising trimethyl glycine.
However, Yamazaki teaches an aqueous ink jet ink containing a pigment (see Yamazaki at para. 0011 and 0076). Yamazaki further teaches the ink may include an amphoteric ion compound, and that by including the amphoteric ion compound, it is possible to more effectively suppress unevenness of image concentration and achieve more excellent glossiness of a recorded image (see Yamazaki at para. 0071). Moreover, Yamazaki teaches trimethyl glycine is more preferable as the amphoteric ion compound from a viewpoint of reliably reducing expansion speed of the recording medium after printing and preventing clogging of an ink ejecting nozzle (see Yamazaki at para. 0072).
Howald teaches their ink to be an ink jet ink that may contain other conventional additives (see Howald at pg. 1, para. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add trimethyl glycine to the aqueous inkjet ink of Howald. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to effectively suppress unevenness of image concentration, achieve more excellent glossiness of a recorded image, reliably reduce expansion speed of the recording medium after printing, and/or prevent clogging of an ink ejecting nozzle (see Yamazaki at para. 0071-0072).
Regarding claim 2, see Howald at pg. 2, para. 6, teaching the ink as containing 6 to 25 wt% of polyhydric alcohol, i.e., glycerin; this range overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 5, see Howald at pg. 4, para. 5, teaching their inks as being loaded into a printer, i.e., a recording apparatus; alternatively, it is noted that the claimed limitation is a recitation of intended use; since the structure of the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim, the same is considered capable of meeting the limitation, see MPEP § 2111.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been considered. The Examiner agrees with Applicants that the amended claims overcome the previous prior art grounds of rejection (see Applicant’s Remarks at pg. 4-5). However, new grounds of rejection are presented, setting forth the claims as unpatentable, see rejections above.
Examiner’s Suggestions
In the interest of expedited prosecution, the Examiner proposes a potential amendment to overcome the current grounds of rejection. It is noted that this amendment is suggested following a brief, cursory glance of the specification and the prior art, and there is no guarantee such amendment won’t read on the current references upon a more detailed review. Moreover, further search and consideration would be required if such amendment is added (i.e., allowability is NOT guaranteed following the incorporation of such amendment). Lastly, Applicants may use all or none of such suggestion – it is merely intended as a helpful starting point for potential future amendments, if desired. If Applicants wish to clarify or discuss the below suggested amendment further, the Examiner invites Applicants to telephone for an interview.
Amendment Suggestion 1 (support found at para. 0029-0030 of Applicant’s specification):
An aqueous ink jet ink composition comprising:
a color material, water, trimethyl glycine, a polyhydric alcohol having a standard boiling point of 270.0°C or more and less than 304.0°C, and 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone, wherein
a mass ratio of the content of the polyhydric alcohol to that of 1-(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-pyrrolidone is 6.5 or more and 7.0 or less,
wherein the color material consists of an acid dye, a reactive dye, a direct dye, or combinations thereof.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shinohara (US-20150166819-A1) teach an image forming method (see Shinohara at Abstract).
Okuyama (JP-2016068538-A), with reference to the previously included machine translation, teaches an ink jet recording device (see Okuyama at Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey E Barzach whose telephone number is (571)272-8735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday; 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Amber R Orlando can be reached on 571-270-3149. 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.
/J.E.B./
Examiner, Art Unit 1731
/AMBER R ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights