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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-8 and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al (KR 10-1966803 and its machine translation) in view of Mizuno et al (WO 2017/159552 and its machine translation).
Cho et al disclose a colored photosensitive resin composition comprising a colorant, an alkali-soluble binder resin, a photopolymerizable compound, a photoinitiator, a solvent, and a thermal initiator (claim 1), wherein the thermal initiator is a peroxide type (claim 4; instant claim 2).
The reference preferably comprises the thermal initiator and photopolymerization initiator be present in amounts of 1 to 10 wt% based on the total weight of the solid content, and 0.1 to 40 wt% of the total solid content, respectively ([0091], [0098], [0114]-[0116]; instant claims 4, 11, 12).
With respect to the limitation requiring that the half-life of the thermal polymerization initiator, the preferred examples of the reference include compounds preferred and claimed by the instant invention as possessing this property. Examples include peroxydicarbonates, lauroyl peroxide, benzoyl peroxide, peroxyesters including peroxyneodecanoates, pivalates, and neoheptanoates (instant claims 1-3).
With respect to the newly amended limitation to the polymerizable compound which now requires the polymerizable compound to include both a photopolymerizable compound and a thermally polymerizable compound (formally claim 10), and wherein the thermally polymerizable compound is included in an amount of 0.5 to 5 wt% (included from the specification), the claims as newly amended the thermally polymerizable compound be a thiol-based compound as included from the specification.
The reference teaches that multiple acryl-based polymerizable compounds may be included in combination and that the thermal initiator aids in additional hardening of the photopolymerizable compound, therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to prepare the composition employing multiple compounds, wherein the compound is also thermally polymerizable as taught by the reference and meeting the limitations of the instant claim 10 ([0069]-[0079]. The compound is taught to be included in an amount of 5 to 50%, preferably 7 to 45% by weight of the composition, therefore when two are included at the lower end of the range, each would fall within the scope of the instant claim limitations of about 2.5 to 3.5, with examples for a single compound (M) in Table 1 at 2.1 to 3.4 weight %.
Therefore, one of skill in the art would have been motivated to include multiple compounds, each being thermally polymerizable and photopolymerizable, wherein the compounds are included in amount falling within the scope of the instant claim 1 of 0.5 to 5 wt %, and wherein one of skill in the art would have envisaged including the compounds in equal amounts by weight, and a weight ratio of 1:1 as required by the instant claim 11.
While the reference teaches the inclusion of a combination of polymerizable compounds may be included, but fails to disclose a thiol-containing polymerizable compound.
Chung et al disclose a curable composition comprising a peroxide initiator and a polymerizable compound, wherein the compound includes a (thermally) polymerizable compound selected from (meth)acrylates, oxetanes, and thiols, which may be used in combination (see table 1, [0180]-[0198], claims). The thiol compound increase the degree of curing and and crosslinking efficiency by being photo and thermally polymerizable.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention, to prepare the material of Cho et al, choosing as a polymerizable compound, a thiol compound as taught by Chung et al as one of a small group preferably used and in combination with (meth)acrylate polymerizable compounds to increase crosslinking and curing efficiency. As taught by Cho et al, the compound, when added, would fall within the scope of the instant claims for the additive amount.
The colorant comprises carbon black, a pigment, or a dye (instant claim 5), and phthalocyanine dyes are contemplated as green and blue dyes (instant claim 6).
The reference is silent with respect to the amount of each of the dye and pigment when included in combination, but does teach that when combinations of colorants are included, the amounts are similar (such as a black pigment 3 to 25% and a blue colorant in 5 to 25% and red or violent added to them in 3 to 15% as examples; [0028]-[0046]) one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed amount of the dye included in an amount of more than the pigment based on routine experimentation and optimization of the composition properties as required by the instant claim 7.
The binder resin preferably includes acrylate-based resins (instant claim 8; [0060]-[0067]).
With respect to the instant claim 12, each of the components is taught by the reference to broadly fall within the range as set forth by claim 12: binder 5 to 60 wt %, colorant 25-55 wt%, polymerizable compound 5 to 50 wt %, and initiator 0.1 to 40 wt %, (see claims). While the ranges of the reference are broader than that as set forth for each component in claim 12, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed ranges through routine experimentation given the overlap of the ranges of the references and that of the instant claims.
Additional preferred additives include surfactants, coupling agents, and other known additives thus meeting the limitations of the instant claim 13 ([0113]).
The composition is used to form a film in a color filter device (abstract; instant claims 14 and 15).
Given the broadest teachings of the reference, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Cho et al, choosing the include the photopolymerization initiator and include a thermal initiator in amounts falling within the scope of the instant claim 1, wherein the compounds are added in equal amounts.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al in view of Mizuno et al (WO 2017/159552 and its machine translation).
Cho et al has been discussed above. The reference further teaches, additional compounds in the composition in combination with the binder, solvent, initiator, and polymerizable compounds.
Alternatively to the above rejection, the reference teaches additional thermal curing agents capable of ring-opening polymerization with the thermal initiator, such as melamines, oxetanes, epoxy/ glycidyl (meth)acrylates, which may be included in the composition and fit the broad definition of thermally polymerizable additive as the curing agent to thermally polymerizes and cures and other known and suitable additives may be included. While the reference is silent with respect to the amount added specifically, the reference does teach that all additives (including the additional known compounds) are included in an amount of 0.01 to 10% by weight, preferably 0.05 to 2% by weight, which overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of the reference, choosing to include the additive in an amount falling within the instant claim limitations. Alternatively, given the broader range, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed weight ratio through routine experimentation and optimization of curing and hardening properties of the material ([0118]-[0122]).
The reference teaches that known additives may be included, but fails to specifically disclose a thiol compound.
Mizuno et al disclose a polymerizable composition comprising a polyfunctional thiol to aid in polymerization and curing as a chain transfer agent to combination with a resin, initiator, curing agents, and other known additives. The compounds are known and advantageous in similar composition with similar compounds ([0105].
Given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Cho et al, choosing as an additive, the thiol chain transfer agent to aid polymerization as taught by Mizuno et al in an amount as taught by Cho et al, wherein the resultant composition would comprise each additive as instantly claimed.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al in view of Chung et al or Mizuno et al in view of Uchikawa (2104/0175342).
Cho et al, Chung et al, and Mizuno et al have been discussed above. The reference is broad with respect to the type of alkali-soluble binder resin. The Cho et al reference teaches that known binders may be includes such as (meth)acrylate-based binders, and others may be included, however, the reference fails to specifically disclose the inclusion of a cardo-based resin.
Uchikawa disclose a coloring composition for a color filter device wherein the composition comprises similar general components, including a binder. The reference teaches that the binder includes an acrylic-based bonder, a cardo-based binder, or a combination ([0053]-[0071]). The reference is silent with respect to the amount, however one of ordinary skill in the art would have immediately envisages an equal weight ratio of the combination of binders.
Therefore, given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the material of Cho et al in view of either of Chung et al or Mizuno et al, choosing as the binder, an acryl-based binder, a carbon-based binder, or combination thereof and in a weight ratio of 1:1 as taught and suggested by Uchikawa. The resultant composition would meet the limitations of the instant claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9 and 11-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant amended claim 1 to include new limitations from the specification, requiring a thiol compound. All arguments were to the reference not including a thiol compound, and a new rejections addressing the newly added claim limitations have been presented above.
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 AMANDA C WALKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1337. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 5:30am to 4pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/AMANDA C. WALKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights