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 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al (KR 10-1966803 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).
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]).
The instant specification teaches that the thermally polymerizable compound may include a (meth)acrylate-based compound, oxetane-based compound, a thiol-based compound or combination. 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, each being an acryl-based polymerizable compound, wherein the compound is also thermally polymerizable as taught by the reference and meeting the limitations of the instant claim 10 ([0069]-[0079]. Furthermore, 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. Furthermore, 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 compounds. While the reference is silent with respect to the amount added, 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]).
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) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al in view of Uchikawa (2104/0175342).
Cho et al has been discussed above. The reference is broad with respect to the type of alkali-soluble binder resin. The 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 wright 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, 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 filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has argued that the primary reference Cho et al fails to fairly teach or suggest a composition comprising the components as claimed, wherein the thermal polymerization initiator is present in an amount equal to or greater than that of the photopolymerization initiator.
Specifically, applicant has pointed to the examples of the Cho et al reference rather than the broadest teachings of the specification.
The claims were rejected over primary reference Cho et al, which teaches a composition comprising both a thermal acid generator (TAG) and a photopolymerization initiator. While the reference teaches that each compound may be present, broadly, in amounts of 1 to 10 wt%, thus same ranges, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed amount through routine experimentation. However, applicant has argued that the Cho et al reference teaches away from this as every example includes the TAG in an amount much less than the photopolymerization initiator. Upon reconsidering the teachings of the reference, each inventive sample does indeed include the TAG in an amount less than the polymerization initiator, however, the reference is not limited to the preferred examples and teachings. As discussed above, the reference’s broadest teachings present the same ranges for the addition of each compound, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include them at least in equal amounts. Furthermore, given the equal ranges, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the amounts as instantly claimed through routine experimentation to optimize properties given the reference teaches one of ordinary skill in the art to includes the compounds in the same ranges.
Applicant has further argued that the inventive samples in the instant invention also teach away from the amount of TAG being equal to or greater than the polymerization initiator as being obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. The experimental examples have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant only noted comparative examples 1 wherein the amount of TAG is less than that of inventive example 1 having the same compounds and all other additives I the same amounts for direct comparisons. However, applicant omits and discussion of comparative examples 2 through 6, each which include the TAG in amounts greater than that of the polymerization initiator, but results in worse chemical resistance (see tables 2 and 3). Therefore, it appears as though the broad addition of a TAG in an amount of equal to or greater does not demonstrate unexpected and superior results across the range with worse results included (see comparative samples 2 to 6) and the rejections of record are maintained.
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 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