DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendments
In response to the amendment received on 12/02/2025:
• Claims 1-14 are currently pending. The objection to claim 10 is withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 claims the presence of a water-soluble coloring material; however, claims 1 and 3 (which claim 4 depends upon) claim the coloring material to be water-insoluble. Thus, a discrepancy exists between the claims, i.e., it is unclear whether the coloring material is water-soluble or water-insoluble. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting any composition that meets claim 3 to also meet claim 4. To correct, the Examiner suggests deleting claim 4.
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, 5-6, 9-10, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breton et al. (US-5626654-A) (hereinafter referred to as “Breton”) in view of Klitzman et al. (US-6013122-A) (hereinafter referred to as “Klitzman”) and Huynh et al. (US-20080160084-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Huynh”).
Regarding claim 1, Breton teaches an ink jet ink composition (see Breton at col. 4, lines 20-22, teaching an ink composition suitable for ink jet printing) comprising:
• water (see Breton at col. 4, lines 48-50, teaching the ink as comprising an aqueous liquid vehicle);
• a phospholipid that forms a fine particle; and a coloring material that is incorporated in the fine particle (see Breton at col. 4, lines 48-50, teaching the ink as containing a dye and a vesicle-forming lipid; also see Breton at col. 5, lines 6-7, teaching the vesicles as being liposomes; also see Breton at col. 5, lines 46-49 and claim 2, teaching glycerophospholipids as being the lipid that forms the liposome; also see Breton at col. 10, lines 11-14, teaching the ink as containing a dye colorant which may be contained within the central cavity of the liposome; also see Figure 2 of Breton, showing an example drawing of the vesicle; thus, Breton necessarily teaches a fine particle (liposome) formed from a phospholipid (glycerophospholipid), as well as a colorant (dye) incorporated within the particle).
While Breton teaches the ink outlined above, Breton fails to explicitly teach the coloring material as being a water-insoluble coloring material that is an oil-soluble dye or an oil-soluble pigment derived from an animal or a plant.
However, Klitzman teaches a tattoo ink (see Klitzman at col. 2, lines 36-37). Klitzman further teaches the pigments or dyes in the ink can be encapsulated in liposomes formed from phospholipids (see KIitzman at col. 8, lines 66-67 and col. 9, lines 26-28). Moreover, Klitzman teaches colorants obtained from natural sources, such as annatto extract, may be used in the ink (see Klitzman at col. 12, lines 29-35).
Dyes obtained from annatto extract are known to be water-insoluble, and are further known to suitably be encapsulated (see Huynh at para. 0002, 0007, and 0034). Additionally, one of ordinary skill would readily recognize the common sense environmental and sustainable benefits of using a natural dye like annatto extract.
Breton teaches their colorant may include oil soluble dyes (see Breton at col. 10, lines 25-27).
In this case, dyes obtained from annatto extract are known water-insoluble natural dyes suitable for use as colorants in liposome vesicles in ink compositions (as exemplified by Klitzman at col. 8, lines 66-67, col. 9, lines 26-28, and col. 12, lines 29-35), and thus its use in the ink of Breton would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a water-insoluble dye obtained from annatto as the oil-soluble dye in the ink of Breton, as the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), and MPEP § 2144.07. Combining known elements to obtain predictable results is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP § 2143. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to use a natural and environmentally friendly colorant.
Annatto coloring agents are oil-soluble dyes, as disclosed by Applicants in their specification at para. 0030.
Regarding claims 5-6, see Breton at col. 7, lines 39-41, teaching cholesterol can be included to improve the stability of the liposomes; cholesterol is a lipid that has a steroid skeleton, as disclosed by Applicant’s specification at para. 0057; also see Breton at col. 7, lines 41-46, teaching an example liposomal mixture (a) containing 0.63 parts of phosphatidyl choline, 0.14 parts of phosphatidic acid, 0.39 parts of cholesterol, and 10 parts of water; thus, Breton necessarily teaches embodiments in which the mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the lipid having a steroid skeleton is 1.97 ((0.63 parts of phosphatidyl choline + 0.14 parts of phosphatidic acid)/0.39 parts of cholesterol = 1.97); this value of 1.97 falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 9, see Breton at col. 5, lines 6-7, teaching the vesicles as being liposomes; also see Fig. 2 of Breton, illustrating the vesicles as being a bimolecular membrane.
Regarding claim 10, see Breton at col. 8, lines 53-56, teaching the average particle diameter of the vesicles to preferably range from less than about 200 nm; this range overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claims 13-14, see Breton at col. 21, lines 24-49.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breton in view of Klitzman and Huynh, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tanaka (US-20220402265-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Tanaka”).
Regarding claims 7-8, while modified Breton teaches the ink jet ink composition according to claim 1 outlined above, modified Breton fails to explicitly teach the ink as further comprising a cellulose derivative, wherein a mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the cellulose derivative is 1 or greater and 5 or less.
However, Tanaka teaches an ink jet ink composition containing a pigment, a cellulose derivative, a first water-soluble organic solvent, a second water-soluble organic solvent, and water (see Tanaka at para. 0004). Tanaka further teaches that as a result of the ink containing a cellulose derivative, coalescence of the ink droplets on the recording medium can be inhibited, resulting in high-quality images with less blurring to be obtained (see Tanaka at para. 0048). Moreover, Tanaka teaches the content of the cellulose derivative to range from 0.01 to 0.20% by mass in the ink, and that when the content is outside this range, ink bleeding occurs and ejection property reduces (see Tanaka at para. 0049).
Breton teaches other additives may be present in their ink (see Breton at col. 19, line 24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a cellulose derivative in the ink of Breton in an amount ranging from 0.01 to 0.20% by mass. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to obtain high-quality images as well as to reduce bleeding and poor ejection properties (see Tanaka at para. 0048-0049).
Following the above modification, the ink of modified Breton contains 0.01 to 0.20 wt% of a cellulose derivative. Furthermore, Breton teaches the vesicle-forming lipid (i.e., the phospholipid) to be present in their ink in a range of from about 0.5 to about 20 wt% (see Breton at col. 8, lines 27-32). Thus, the ratio of phospholipid to cellulose derivative ranges from 2.5 to 2,000 (0.5/0.2 = 2.5; 20/0.01 = 2,000). This range of 2.5 to 2,000 overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breton in view of Klitzman and Huynh, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Koganehira et al. (US-20070247504-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Koganehira”).
Regarding claims 11-12, while modified Breton teaches the ink jet ink composition according to claim 1 outlined above, modified Breton fails to explicitly teach the ink as further comprising a carbohydrate, wherein a mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the carbohydrate is 0.5 or greater and 5.0 or less.
However, Koganehira teaches an ink composition for ink jet recording (see Koganehira at para. 0002). Koganehira further teaches the ink to comprise a wetting agent, and that sugar alcohols like xylitol are particularly preferred (see Koganehira at para. 0058).
Breton teaches their ink may include a wetting agent, and that the wetting agent may range from 0.01 to 10 wt% of the ink, which overlaps the range taught by Koganehira for their wetting agent (see Breton at col. 19, lines 24-43; also see Koganehira at para. 0059).
In this case, sugar alcohols like xylitol are known materials suitable for use as wetting agents in inkjet ink compositions (as exemplified by Koganehira at para. 0058), and thus their use as the wetting agent in the ink of Breton would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use xylitol as the wetting agent in the ink of Breton, as the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), and MPEP § 2144.07. Combining known elements to obtain predictable results is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP § 2143.
Breton teaches the content of the wetting agent in their ink may range from 0.01 to 10 wt% (see Breton at col. 19, lines 38-41), and also teaches the vesicle-forming lipid (i.e., the phospholipid) to be present in their ink in a range of from about 0.5 to about 20 wt% (see Breton at col. 8, lines 27-32). Thus, the ratio of phospholipid to the carbohydrate (e.g., xylitol) ranges from 0.05 to 2,000 (0.5/10 = 0.05; 20/0.01 = 2,000). This range of 0.05 to 2,000 overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Claims 1-4, 9-10, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gore (US-5911816-A) (hereinafter referred to as “Gore”) in view of Klitzman.
Regarding claims 1-4, Gore teaches an ink jet ink composition (see Gore at col. 5, lines 18-19, teaching an ink composition suitable for use in ink jet printing) comprising:
• water (see Gore at col. 5, lines 55-57, teaching the ink compositions as containing water; also see ink Example 4 of Gore at col. 6, lines 59-60, teaching an example ink containing water; thus, Gore reasonably suggests their ink to include water as exemplified in their example embodiments);
• a phospholipid that forms a fine particle; and a coloring material that is incorporated in the fine particle (see Gore at col. 1, lines 53-55, teaching the ink as containing liposome vesicles with a water-insoluble dye or pigment contained therein; also see Gore at col. 3, lines 61-66, teaching the liposome forming material may include phosphatidylcholines, which are a phospholipid; also see Gore at col. 4, lines 21-24, teaching the water-insoluble material as being encapsulated in the liposome).
While Gore teaches the ink jet ink composition outlined above, Gore fails to explicitly teach the water-insoluble coloring material as being an oil-soluble dye or an oil-soluble pigment derived from an animal or a plant (oil-soluble pigment derived from a plant, regarding claims 2-3).
However, Klitzman teaches a tattoo ink (see Klitzman at col. 2, lines 36-37). Klitzman further teaches the pigments or dyes in the ink can be encapsulated in liposomes formed from phospholipids (see KIitzman at col. 8, lines 66-67 and col. 9, lines 26-28). Moreover, Klitzman teaches colorants obtained from natural sources, such as annatto extract or turmeric, may be used in the ink (see Klitzman at col. 12, lines 29-35).
In general, one of ordinary skill would readily recognize the common sense environmental and sustainable benefits of using a natural colorant like annatto extract or turmeric as a colorant in the ink of Gore.
Gore teaches their insoluble colorant includes any substantially water-insoluble coloring agent (see Gore at col. 2, lines 19-22).
In this case, annatto extract or turmeric are known water-insoluble natural colorants suitable for use as colorants in liposome vesicles in ink compositions (as exemplified by Klitzman at col. 8, lines 66-67, col. 9, lines 26-28, and col. 12, lines 29-35), and thus their use in the ink of Gore would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a water-insoluble colorant obtained from annatto or turmeric as the insoluble colorant in the ink of Gore, as the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), and MPEP § 2144.07. Combining known elements to obtain predictable results is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP § 2143. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to use a natural and environmentally friendly colorant.
Annatto coloring agents are oil-soluble dyes derived from a plant, as disclosed by Applicants in their specification at para. 0030. Furthermore, turmeric colorants are oil-soluble pigments derived from a plant, as disclosed by Applicants in their specification at para. 0030.
Regarding claim 9, see Gore at col. 1, lines 53-57, teaching the liposomes may be unilamellar or multilamellar; also see Gore at col. 3, lines 34-46.
Regarding claim 10, see Gore at claim 4, teaching the size of the liposome vesicles to range from less than or equal to 140 nm; this range overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claims 13-14, see Gore at col. 1, lines 11-15; also see Gore at col. 6, lines 37-40.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gore in view of Klitzman, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Breton.
Regarding claims 5-6, while modified Gore teaches the ink jet ink composition according to claim 1 outlined above, modified Gore fails to explicitly teach the ink as further comprising a lipid that has a steroid skeleton, wherein a mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the lipid having a steroid skeleton is 1 or greater and 5 or less.
However, Breton teaches an ink composition containing an aqueous liquid vehicle, a dye, and a vesicle-forming lipid (see Breton at col. 4, lines 48-50). Breton further teaches the vesicles may be liposomes formed from glycerophospholipids (see Breton at col. 5, lines 6-7 and col. 5, lines 46-48). Moreover, Breton teaches cholesterol may be employed to improve the stability of the liposomes, and further teaches an example phospholipid to cholesterol ratio of 1.97 (see Breton at col. 7, lines 39-46, teaching an example liposomal mixture (a) containing 0.63 parts of phosphatidyl choline, 0.14 parts of phosphatidic acid, 0.39 parts of cholesterol, and 10 parts of water; thus, Breton necessarily teaches embodiments in which the mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the lipid having a steroid skeleton is 1.97 ((0.63 parts of phosphatidyl choline + 0.14 parts of phosphatidic acid)/0.39 parts of cholesterol = 1.97)).
Gore teaches their liposome forming material may include phosphatidylcholines, cholesterol, other lipids, and mixtures thereof (see Gore at col. 3, lines 61-67 and col. 4, lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use cholesterol together with a phospholipid, like phosphatidylcholine, as the liposome forming material in the liposomes of Gore, wherein the ratio of the phospholipid to the cholesterol is 1.97. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the stability of the liposomes (see Breton at col. 7, lines 39-46). Moreover, combining known elements to obtain predictable results is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP § 2143.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gore in view of Klitzman, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tanaka.
Regarding claims 7-8, while modified Gore teaches the ink jet ink composition according to claim 1 outlined above, modified Gore fails to explicitly teach the ink as further comprising a cellulose derivative, wherein a mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the cellulose derivative is 1 or greater and 5 or less.
However, Tanaka teaches an ink jet ink composition containing a pigment, a cellulose derivative, a first water-soluble organic solvent, a second water-soluble organic solvent, and water (see Tanaka at para. 0004). Tanaka further teaches that as a result of the ink containing a cellulose derivative, coalescence of the ink droplets on the recording medium can be inhibited, resulting in high-quality images with less blurring to be obtained (see Tanaka at para. 0048). Moreover, Tanaka teaches the content of the cellulose derivative to range from 0.01 to 0.20% by mass in the ink, and that when the content is outside this range, ink bleeding occurs and ejection property reduces (see Tanaka at para. 0049).
Gore teaches other ingredients may be added to the ink composition (see Gore at col. 4, line 46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a cellulose derivative in the ink of Gore in an amount ranging from 0.01 to 0.20% by mass. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to obtain high-quality images as well as to reduce bleeding and poor ejection properties (see Tanaka at para. 0048-0049).
Following the above modification, the ink of modified Gore contains 0.01 to 0.20 wt% of a cellulose derivative. Furthermore, Gore teaches the liposome forming materials (i.e., the phospholipid) to be present in their ink in a range of from 1 to 30 wt% (see Gore at col. 4, lines 13-15). Thus, the ratio of phospholipid to cellulose derivative ranges from 5 to 3,000 (1/0.2 = 5; 30/0.01 = 3,000). This range of 5 to 3,000 touches an end-point of the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gore in view of Klitzman, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yanagihara et al. (US-20050036018-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Yanagihara”).
Regarding claims 11-12, while modified Gore teaches the ink jet ink composition according to claim 1 outlined above, modified Gore fails to explicitly teach the ink as further comprising a carbohydrate, wherein a mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the carbohydrate is 0.5 or greater and 5.0 or less.
However, Yanagihara teaches an ink set for inkjet printing (see Yanagihara at para. 0012). Yanagihara further teaches the inks to contain a humectant, such as sorbitol, from the viewpoint of enhancing the stability of the discharge from the nozzle of the inkjet printer’s printing head (see Yanagihara at para. 0021).
Gore teaches their ink may include a humectant, and that the humectant may preferably range from about 10 to about 40 wt% of the ink, which falls within the range taught by Yanagihara for their humectant (see Gore at col. 4, lines 46-67 and col. 5, lines 1-3; also see Yanagihara at para. 0022).
In this case, sugars like sorbitol are known materials suitable for use as humectants in inkjet ink compositions (as exemplified by Yanagihara at para. 0021), and thus their use as the humectant in the ink of Gore would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use sorbitol as the humectant in the ink of Gore, as the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), and MPEP § 2144.07. Combining known elements to obtain predictable results is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP § 2143.
Gore teaches the content of the humectant in their ink may range from 10 to 40 wt% (see Gore at col. 4, lines 46-67 and col. 5, lines 1-3), and also teaches the liposome forming materials (i.e., the phospholipid) to be present in their ink in a range of from 1 to 30 wt% (see Gore at col. 4, lines 13-15). Thus, the ratio of phospholipid to the carbohydrate (e.g., sorbitol) ranges from 0.035 to 3 (1/40 = 0.035; 30/10 = 3). This range of 0.035 to 3 overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Claims 1-5, 7, 10, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre et al. (US-20230398058-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Pierre”) in view of Klitzman.
Regarding claims 1-4, Pierre teaches an ink composition (see Pierre at para. 0009, teaching an ink composition comprising a plurality of ink particles) comprising:
• water (see Pierre at para. 0117 and 0121, teaching the ink may include a liquid carrier, such as water);
• a phospholipid that forms a fine particle; and a coloring material that is incorporated in the fine particle (see Pierre at para. 0006, teaching ink particles comprising a) a core comprising a coloring agent and a polymer, and b) an outermost layer comprising a surfactant or a dispersant, wherein the outermost layer at least partially covers the outer surface of the core; also see Pierre at para. 0076-0077, teaching the surfactant that at least partially covers the outer surface of the core may include a phospholipid; also see Fig. 2A-2C of Pierre, showing a particle formed from a surfactant/dispersant and a coloring material encapsulated within the core of the particle);
While Pierre teaches the ink composition outlined above, Pierre fails to explicitly teach the water-insoluble coloring material as being an oil-soluble dye or an oil-soluble pigment derived from an animal or a plant (oil-soluble pigment derived from a plant, regarding claims 2-3).
However, Klitzman teaches a tattoo ink (see Klitzman at col. 2, lines 36-37). Klitzman further teaches the pigments or dyes in the ink can be encapsulated in liposomes formed from phospholipids (see KIitzman at col. 8, lines 66-67 and col. 9, lines 26-28). Moreover, Klitzman teaches colorants obtained from natural sources, such as turmeric, may be used in the ink (see Klitzman at col. 12, lines 29-35).
In general, one of ordinary skill would readily recognize the common sense environmental and sustainable benefits of using a natural colorant like turmeric.
Pierre teaches their colorant may include a pigment, and further teaches their ink for use in tattooing (see Pieere at para. 0015 and 0045).
In this case, turmeric is a known water-insoluble natural colorant suitable for use as a colorant in liposome vesicles in ink compositions (as exemplified by Klitzman at col. 8, lines 66-67, col. 9, lines 26-28, and col. 12, lines 29-35), and thus its use in the ink of Pierre would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a water-insoluble colorant obtained from turmeric as the colorant in the ink of Pierre, as the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), and MPEP § 2144.07. Combining known elements to obtain predictable results is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP § 2143. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to use a natural and environmentally friendly colorant.
Turmeric colorants are oil-soluble pigments derived from a plant, as disclosed by Applicants in their specification at para. 0030.
It is noted that the limitation of claim 1 indicating the ink to be an “inkjet” ink is a recitation of intended use (i.e., the ink is to be used in an inkjet process). 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.
Regarding claim 5, see Pierre at para. 0136, teaching the ink may include an emulsifying agent, such as cholesterol; cholesterol is a lipid that has a steroid skeleton, as disclosed by Applicant’s specification at para. 0057.
Regarding claim 7, see Pierre at para. 0133, teaching the ink may include a binder, such as carboxymethylcellulose.
Regarding claim 10, see Pierre at para. 0063, teaching the diameter of the ink particle to range from 10 nm to 100 µm, which overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 11, see Pierre at para. 0133, teaching the ink may include a binder, such as starch; starch is a carbohydrate, as disclosed by Applicant’s specification at para. 0063.
Regarding claim 14, see Pierre at para. 0167; the skin taught by Pierre corresponds to the claimed “recording medium” and the resulting tattoo formed corresponds to the claimed “recorded material”.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for at least the reasons set forth below.
First, Applicants argue Breton, Gore, and Pierre all teach the use of water-soluble coloring materials, and that thus, the amended claims overcome Breton, Gore, and Pierre (see Applicant’s Remarks at pg. 5-6).
However, this is not found to be persuasive and so the Examiner must respectfully disagree for the following reasons.
The Examiner agrees that the amendments to the claims overcome the previous 102 rejections – however, 103 rejections over the cited references still apply. Breton teaches their colorant may include oil soluble dyes (see Breton at col. 10, lines 25-27). Further, Gore teaches their colorant may include any substantially water-insoluble coloring agent (see Gore at col. 2, lines 19-22). Additionally, Pierre broadly teaches their coloring agent may be a pigment (see Pierre at para. 0045). Accordingly, none of the cited references preclude the use of a water-insoluble coloring material in their ink.
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 (change the claims to be a method):
A recording method comprising:
jetting an ink jet ink composition from an ink jet head to adhere to a recording medium, wherein the ink jet ink composition comprises:
water;
a phospholipid that forms a fine particle;
a coloring material that is incorporated in the fine particle, and
a cellulose derivative,
wherein the coloring material is a water-insoluble coloring material that is ; and
wherein a mass ratio of a content of the phospholipid to a content of the cellulose derivative is 0.5 or greater and 3 or less.
Examiner note: the above amendment would appear to overcome the current grounds of rejection over Breton by specifying the colorant to be “an oil-soluble pigment derived from an animal or a plant”; Breton only teaches the use of a dye as their colorant (see Breton at Abstract). Further, the above amendment would appear to overcome the current grounds of rejection over Gore by amending the cellulose derivative ratio to be “0.5 to 3,” which falls outside the ratio of “5 to 3,000” in the current grounds of rejection over Gore above. Lastly, the above amendment would appear to overcome the current grounds of rejection over Pierre by amending the claims to be a recording method for ink jet printing; Pierre teaches a tattoo ink for injection into skin and not an ink jet printing method (see Pierre at para. 0015).
It is noted that these observations are all based on a cursory glance, and such references potentially may still read on the proposed amendment above upon a closer inspection or upon further search and/or consideration.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
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