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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to the Amendment received on 1-22-2026, the examiner has carefully considered the amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Cong teaches “substantially” away from the bifunctional urethane (meth) acrylate oligomer being above 20 wt. % based upon the total amount of polymerizable components based upon the teaching which Cong limits the oligomer component to “up to 20 wt. %” as argued in the rejection and taught in col. 5, lines 18-19. The teachings of Cong set forth said oligomer may be added in amounts from “approximately 2%-20% by weight”. It is deemed, at least, applicants lower limit is within the tolerances (+/- 5) of approximately 20 wt. % without deviating from the discloses low viscosity teaching of the reference. Applicant has provided no evidence a composition set forth according to Cong composition 22 wt. % is distinguishable from a composition which comprises up to 20 wt. %, as argued. It is deemed, in absence of evidence to the contrary, a skilled artisan would expect to obtain a composition which is gloss-controllable and low viscosity, as expressed in the overall teachings of Cong.
Applicant additionally argues the secondary reference would not lead a skilled artisan to use the disclosed photoinitiator composition in Cong which is a low viscosity since Visconti sets forth Flexo inks and offset inks which are usually high viscosity compositions. Instant claim 1 does not require a viscosity nor does Visconti set forth a viscosity. Additionally, the teachings of the secondary reference was not relied upon for it is properties, such as viscosity, but to show the oligomeric alpha-hydroxy photoinitiator is known in the art for providing low order, excellent gloss and improved curability in similar compositions, i.e., those comprising high mono-functional content and low urethane diacrylate oligomer content. Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary the rejection still stands.
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) 1-4 and 6-10 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cong et al (9,260,616) in view of Visconti et al (Radtech, 2006).
Cong teaches gloss-controllable radiation curable inkjet ink composition. Cong sets forth said ink may comprise approximately 8-18 % of photoinitiators responding to UVA (320-400 nm) and UVV (400-450 nm) to initiate free radicals and approximately 60 to 85 % of highly flexible mono-functional monomers—see abstract.
Cong teaches because each colorant, therefore, competes with the photo-initiator at one or more bandwidths in the UV range specific to the colorant and/or the ink composition containing the colorant in absorbing UV energy, the absorbance signature of the particular colorant itself and/or of an ink composition containing the particular colorant is an important element to consider when tailoring the photo-initiator component to achieve uniform drop spread across inks of different colors when exposed to UV radiation for one of both of pinning and curing. Therefore, by tailoring one or both of the composition and the concentration of the photo-initiator component in an ink composition to the absorbance signature of one or both of the colorant and the resulting ink composition, it is possible to systematically produce inks of different colors in which drop spread is substantially uniform across ink colors. Cong advises that skillful selection and combination of photo-initiators, such as photo-initiators responding to UVA and UVV (UVA: 320-400 nm wavelengths, UVV: 400-450 nm wavelengths) radiation, but, in some embodiments, photo-initiators responding to UVB and UVC radiation (UVC: 200-280 nm wavelengths, UVB: 280-320 nm wavelengths) as well, in the ink compositions allows a controllable degree of gloss on the surface of the cured ink—see col. 2, lines 58-65.
Said ink compositions comprise 60-85 wt. % of at least one of a plurality of mono-functional monomers; 2-20 wt. % of at least one oligomer; 8-18 by weight per unit volume ink of a photoinitiator component; 0 to 10 wt. % of a co-initiator; 0.01 to 2 % of a surfactant; 0.1 to 2 % of a leveling agent; 0.01 to 2 wt. % of a UV inhibitor/stabilizer;0.05 to 1 % of a free radical scavenger; and 0 to 20 % of a colorant/pigment—see col. 5, lines 6-7; col. 5, lines 17-18; col. 5, line 65; col. 6, lines 60-61; col. 7, lines 16, 45-46, 55-56 and 65. Said ink composition has a viscosity at 25 deg. C of not greater than 40 cPs—see col. 8, lines 52-55.
Per table 3: Cong sets forth an ink composition comprising 2 wt. % of a cyan pigment dispersion; 7 wt. % of propoxylated (2) neopentyl glycol diacrylate; 11.30 wt. % of a urethane diacrylate based on a polyester polyol (CN991); 18.0 % of tetrahydrofurfuryl acrylate; 33.00 wt. % of vinylcaprolactam; 15.35 wt. % of cyclic trimethylolpropane formal acrylate; 0.30 wt. % of a stabilizer; 0.50 wt. % of a leveling agent; 0.05 of a polyether-modified polydimethylsiloxane surfactant; 8.0 wt. % of TPO (photoinitiator); 0.50 wt. % of photoinitiator Irgacure 369; and 4.00 wt. % of photoinitiator Esacure One (oligo[2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-[4-(1-methylvinyl)phenyl]propanone]).
Cong does not expressly set forth the polyester-polyurethane di(meth)acrylate resin is used in amounts from at least 20 to 40 parts by weight in the ink composition. However, Cong set forth said difunctional oligomer can be added in amounts of up to 20 wt. % of the ink composition—see col. 5, line 19. Thus, at least applicant’s lower limit of 20 parts by weight is deemed obvious. A skilled artisan would have found been able to obtain an ink composition comprising at least 20 wt. % of a difunctional polyester-polyurethane (meth) acrylate from the overall teachings of the reference with a reasonable expectation of tailoring the flexibility and adhesion of the in to polyolefin surfaces, as suggested in the overall teachings, in absence of evidence to the contrary and/or unexpected results—see col. 5, line 30-35.
Another difference is Cong does not expressly set forth the photoinitiator component comprises benzophenone and an alpha-hydroxyketone oligomer having a 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-oxypropyl group. However, Cong sets forth benzophenone as a UVA and UVV, as well as, a UVB and UVC initiator, as well as, setting forth the use of oligo-hydroxyketone photoinitiators, having a 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-oxypropyl group, as evidenced in the example, as well as, suggested in col. 6, lines 22-56. It is known the photoinitiator combination of benzophenone with an oligo-hydroxyketone photoinitiators, having a 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-oxypropyl group provides radiation curable inks with low order and excellent properties, such as providing a through-cure, solvent resistance and high gloss, as evidenced by Visconti—see figure 3 (page 5) and blend 2 in table under Flexo Ink, as well as, Table III both on page 4. Visconti additionally show the photoinitiator combination of benzophenone with oligo-hydroxyketone photoinitiators, having a 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-oxypropyl group does not compete for radiation with a cyan pigment in at 260 nm where the cyan pigment absorbs, thus non-competing from free radical formation/generated needed from polymerization—see figure 4. Visconti sets forth photoinitiator combination in pigmented ink compositions used in overprint varnishes. Visconti and Cong are analogous art since they are from the same field of endeavor that is the art of radiation curable pigmented inks. It would have been within the skill level of an ordinary artisan to use a known photoinitiator combination of benzophenone and an oligo-hydroxyketone photoinitiator, having a 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-oxypropyl group, such as evidenced by Visconti, as photoinitiator component in the ink composition set forth by Cong with a reasonable expectation of obtaining an ink composition having the desired properties set forth by Cong, such as low odor, good flexibility, excellent print quality and high productivity in absence of evidence to the contrary and/or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 1: It is deemed from the overall teachings of the reference in combination with known teachings a skilled artisan could obtain a radiation curable inkjet ink composition comprising from at least 20 parts by weight of a bi-functional polyester-polyurethane (meth) acrylate oligomer and at least 60-80 parts by weight of a mono-functional (meth) acrylate monomer and a known photoinitiator combination of benzophenone with an oligo-hydroxyketone photoinitiator, having a 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-oxypropyl group with a reasonable expectation of obtaining an ink composition having low odor, good flexibility, good adhesion to a wide variety of substrates and improved gloss in absence of evidence to the contrary and/or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 2: Cong shows the viscosity of said inks at 45 deg. C are less from 10.2 to 13.3 cPs, as evidenced in the examples. Thus, it is deemed the ink compositions inherently have a viscosity of less than or equal to 15 mPa*s (cPs) since viscosity and temperature are inversely proportional in absence of evidence to the contrary and/or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 3: Cong sets forth linear and branched alkyl (meth) acrylates, alicyclic (meth) acrylates, and (meth) acrylates having a dioxane moiety or a dioxolane moiety—see col. 5, lines 10-15 and examples.
Regarding claim 4: Esacure One as found in the examples has a molecular weight of 423 g/mol.
Regarding claim 6: The benzophenone taught by Cong found in col. 6 is 182 g/mol. The benzophenone mixture found in the prior art teaching of Visconti has a combined molecular weight of 440.54 g/mol.
Regarding claim 7: The polyester-polyurethane (meth) acrylate CN991 found in the examples of Cong has a mol. Weight of 1500 g/mol.
Regarding claim 8: Cong sets forth the addition of polyfunctional monomers in said ink composition obvious as evidenced in the examples—see table 3.
Regarding claims 9-10: Cong sets forth printing said ink compositions onto polyolefin substrates and textile materials and curing by exposure to radiation via an inkjet printer—see col. 11, lines 35-45. Thus, the method and decorative sheet are deemed found in the reference.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANZA L MCCLENDON whose telephone number is (571)272-1074. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, Heidi Riviere-Kelley can be reached on 571-270-1831. 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.
/SANZA L. McCLENDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
SMc