Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/758,763

INK, INKJET PRINTING METHOD, AND PRINTING MEDIUM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 13, 2022
Examiner
LEE, DORIS L
Art Unit
1764
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nippon Kayaku Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
4 (Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
609 granted / 1045 resolved
-6.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
1103
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
55.4%
+15.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1045 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
uDETAILED 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 . Response to Amendment The new grounds of rejection set forth below are necessitated by applicant’s amendment filed on February 20, 2026. In particular, claim 1 has been amended to include the limitations of claim 2 as well as presents new limitations which define an organic solvent. The new grounds of rejection set forth below move the arguments from the previous claim 2 into the present claim 1 and further addresses the newly presented limitations. Thus, the following action is properly made final. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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) 1 and 3-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuzaki et al (US 2018/0282564) in view of Komatsu (US 2014/0022321). Regarding claim 1, Matsuzaki teaches an ink composition (Abstract), a water-insoluble colorant (pigment) ([0133]), a compound which reads on formula (1) such as Noigen-149D (HLB: 11.5, R1 =17, m1=8, n1=0) or Emanon 1112 (HLB: 13.7, R1 =11, m1=12, n1=0) ([0088]) or a compound which reads on formula (2) such as Emanon-3299RV (HLB: 19.2, R2=17, R3=17, m2=250, n2=0) and water (Abstract). Matsuzaki teaches that the ink composition further comprises a glycol ether or a C4-C12 alkane diol ([0143]). Matsuzaki teaches that the organic solvent can also include propylene glycol which is a C3 alkanediol. Matsuzaki teaches that other additives can be added to the ink ([0148]), however, fails to teach that the ink contains a polyethylene oxide wax. Komatsu teaches an ink composition which is an aqueous ink ([0076]) and incorporates oxidized polyethylene wax ([0055]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the oxidized polyethylene wax of Komatsu as an additive of the ink of Matsuzaki. One would have been motivated to do so in order to receive the expected benefit of providing gloss and smoothness and rub fastness to the dried ink surface (Komatsu, [0055]). Regarding claim 3, Matsuzaki teaches that the ink further comprises a dispersing agent ([0076]). Regarding claim 4, Matsuzaki teaches an inkjet printing method of performing printing by causing an inkjet printer to discharge a droplet of the ink according to claim 1 and attaching the droplet to a printing medium (Claims). Regarding claim 5, Matsuzaki teaches that the printing medium is non-absorbing (Claim 19). Regarding claim 6, Matsuzaki teaches a printing medium to which the ink according to claim 1 is attached (Examples and claims). Regarding claim 7, Matsuzaki teaches a that the printing medium is non-absorbing (Claim 19). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed February 20, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the reasons set forth below: Applicant’s argument: The ink composition of Matsuzaki comprises a resin dissolving solvent as an essential component. None of the glycol ether, the C3-C12 alkanediol, and the C2-C3 alkanediol are equivalent to the resin dissolving solvent of Matsuzaki, and thus, claim 1 as amended does not encompass the essential resin dissolving solvent of Matsuzaki. Examiner’s response: Claim 1 opens with the transitional phrase “an ink comprising” and the word “comprising” is open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements. Please refer to MPEP 211.03, section I. As such, the presence of the resin dissolving solvent in Matsuzaki does not preclude its use as a prior art reference. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DORIS L LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Arrie Lanee Reuther can be reached at 571-270-7026. 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. DORIS L. LEE Primary Examiner Art Unit 1764 /DORIS L LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 12, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Oct 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 20, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600881
COMPOSITION FOR FORMING HARD COATING LAYER, HARD COATING LAYER USING THE COMPOSITION, AND LAMINATE COMPRISING THE HARD COATING LAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600873
PIGMENT COMPOSITION, PRINTING INK, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING PIGMENT COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590033
FINELY GROUND PORTLAND CEMENT CLINKER IN A CEMENTITIOUS MULTI-COMPONENT MORTAR SYSTEM FOR USE AS AN INORGANIC CHEMICAL FASTENING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577331
RESIN COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570577
METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR INHIBITING FREEZE-THAW DAMAGE IN CONCRETE AND CEMENT PASTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+8.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1045 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month