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 .
Response to Amendment
Claim 1 has been amended to incorporate the limitation of cancelled Claim 8, and to remove a limitation surrounding the preparation of the copolymer. Claim 2 remains cancelled, and Claims 4, 6, and 8 are cancelled. Claim 11 has been amended in a manner similar to that of Claim 1. New Claim 12 and Claim 13 have been added. No new subject matter has been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2025-12-30 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the value of the variable X in formula (I) of amended Claim 1, Applicant argues that the claimed range is critical to the evaluated properties of suppressed electrostatic adhesion between printed materials, heat-resistant storability, and low-temperature fixability. Applicant argues that these properties represent unexpected results arising from the claimed range for X of the toner. However, a reliable relationship does not appear to exist between the claimed range for the value of X, and any of the three evaluated properties just mentioned.
For example, as seen in Applicant’s Table 1 (Specification, page 23, and Remarks, page 5), Example toner 2 possesses a value for X lying outside the claimed range, but has a better evaluation for adhesion strength than Example toners 3, 4, 8, 10, 12, and 13, all of which possess a value for X lying inside the claimed range. In addition, Example toners 12 and 13 (which possess a value for X lying inside the claimed range) have an evaluation for adhesion strength lying outside the desirable range of 1.2 – 1.6 N stated in Applicant’s remarks (Remarks, page 6).
In addition, Example toner 5, which possesses a value for X lying outside the claimed range, has a ranking of “5” in the evaluation of fixation at fold. This score is better than those for Example toners 7, 8, and 13, each of which possess a value for X lying inside the claimed range, but have a score of “3” in the evaluation of fixation at fold.
Finally, Example toners 2 and 5, both of which possess a value for X lying outside the claimed range, have a ranking of “A” in the evaluation of heat-resistant storage property. This score is better than those for Example toners 6 – 8 and 12 – 13, each of which possess a value for X lying inside the claimed range, but have a score of “B” in the evaluation of heat-resistant storage property.
Thus, where a reliable relationship does not appear to exist between the value of X in Formula (I) and any of the above-mentioned evaluations (which serve as indicators for the properties of suppressed electrostatic adhesion between printed materials, heat-resistant storability, and low-temperature fixability), the claimed range for X appears not to be critical to those properties, and the evaluation results do not represent unexpected results of the invention. For these reasons, the updated rejections below are not withdrawn.
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, 3, 5, 7, 9 – 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chonan et al (US PGP 2018/0275544).
Chonan teaches a toner including a toner particle ([0012]), which comprises a binder resin and which may also include a colorant ([0041]). The binder resin is composed of at least a styrene resin and a (meth)acrylic resin ([0054]). The styrene resin may be a homopolymer or a copolymer of a styrene monomer and another monomer ([0064]). p-Methoxystyrene is given as a specific example of a styrene monomer ([0066]), from which a structural unit reading on General formula (1) of Claim 1 is derived. The (meth)acrylic resin may be a homopolymer or a copolymer of a (meth)acrylate monomer and another monomer ([0072]). Isobornyl acrylate is given as a specific example of a (meth)acrylate monomer ([0074]), from which a structural unit reading on General formula (2) of Claim 1 is derived.
Further, Chonan teaches that “any of the styrene resin and the (meth)acrylic acid ester resin may be a copolymer in which a styrene monomer and (meth)acrylic acid ester are at least polymerized” ([0065]). Thus, Chonan allows the styrene resin and/or the (meth)acrylic resin to be a copolymer of a styrene monomer (such as p-methoxystyrene) and a (meth)acrylate monomer (such as isobornyl acrylate).
Chonan teaches that the styrene monomer preferably makes up 15% to 95% by weight of the styrene resin ([0068]), and that the (meth)acrylate monomer preferably makes up 10% to 100% by weight of the acrylic resin. In the case of a styrene-acrylic copolymer (discussed above), these content ranges would allow X (as defined in the instant application) to be as low as 15% (the minimum preferred content of the styrene monomer), and as high as 90% (since the (meth)acrylate monomer should be no less than 10%).
X
m
i
n
=
15
(
15
+
85
)
*
100
%
=
15
%
X
m
a
x
=
90
(
90
+
10
)
*
100
%
=
90
%
The range of 15% – 90% fully encompasses the range stated in Claim 1.
A toner comprising toner base particles, which in turn comprise a colorant and the binder resin just described, satisfies Claim 1.
As mentioned above, p-methoxystyrene is given as an example styrene monomer ([0066]), satisfying Claim 3 and Claim 5.
The styrene, (meth)acrylic, or styrene-(meth)acrylic resins may include other monomers not already mentioned ([0081]). Specific examples given by Chonan include (meth)acrylic acid ([0082]), n-butyl (meth)acrylate, and 2-ethylhexyl (meth)acrylate, satisfying the requirements of Claim 7, Claim 9, and Claim 10.
As discussed above, Chonan teaches that the styrene resin is formed by polymerizing at least the styrene monomer ([0063]), and may be a copolymer of the styrene monomer and another monomer ([0064]). Chonan also exemplifies the polymerization of a mixture of monomers to form a copolymer ([0307] – [0316]). The polymerization results in a precursor core resin particle dispersion ([0316]). Therefore, the toner comprising toner base particles comprising a binder resin and a colorant according to Claim 1 would be prepared by a method which includes a step of copolymerizing monomers satisfying General formula (3) and General formula (4) to yield a particle dispersion liquid, satisfying Claim 11.
Chonan teaches that the total content of the styrene resin and the (meth)acrylic resin in the binder resin may be 85% by weight or more, reading on the range stated in Claim 13.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsubara et al (JP 2018-084663).
Matsubara teaches a toner comprising a binder resin including a polymer A ([0007]) in an amount of 2 – 20% by mass based on the binder resin ([0023]). The toner particles may also contain a colorant ([0043]). Matsubara teaches that polymer A is preferably a copolymer of vinyl monomers, and gives isobornyl acrylate ([0019]) (from which a structural unit reading on General formula (2) of Claim 1 is derived) and p-methoxystyrene ([0021]) (from which a structural unit reading on General formula (1) of Claim 1 is derived) as example vinyl monomers which may be copolymerized.
Matsubara teaches that polycyclic aliphatic hydrocarbon groups (e.g. the isobornyl group of isobornyl acrylate) preferably make up 5% of the mass of polymer A or more ([0022]). This allows the ratio of the mass of a styrene-based monomer (e.g. p-methoxystyrene, corresponding to a first structural unit) to the total mass of a styrene-based monomer and a vinyl monomer having a polycyclic aliphatic hydrocarbon group (e.g. isobornyl acrylate) to lie in the range stated in Claim 1.
Therefore, a toner comprising particles which include at least a colorant and a binder resin containing polymer A, wherein polymer A is a copolymer of structural units reading on General formula (1) and General formula (2) is described by Claim 1.
As mentioned above, p-methoxystyrene is given as an example styrene-based vinyl monomer ([0021]), satisfying Claim 3 and Claim 5.
Matsubara teaches that butyl acrylate and 2-ethylhexyl acrylate are acceptable monomers which may be incorporated into polymer A ([0021]), satisfying Claim 7, Claim 9, and Claim 10.
In the preparation of polymer A exemplified by Matsubara, a mixture containing at least styrene and isobornyl acrylate is polymerized, yielding, before removal of the solvent, a dispersion of resin particles ([0078]). Therefore, the toner of Matsubara as described above, which comprises toner base particles which include at least a colorant and a binder resin, is prepared by a method which satisfies Claim 11.
Matsubara does not appear to teach toner particles having a “sea-island” or “matrix-domain” structure. In addition, Matsubara details a melt-kneading method of producing toner particles ([0055] – [0059]) which would result in homogeneous toner particles, satisfying Claim 12.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Grant S Seiler whose telephone number is (571)272-3015. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 5:30 Pacific.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/GRANT STEVEN SEILER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/PETER L VAJDA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 02/19/2026