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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/6/26 and 12/18/25 has been entered.
The amendment of 1/6/26 and 12/18/25 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-18, and 20 are pending.
Rejections
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Application Publication No. 2008/0163777 Bock et al. in view of CN 112094539 Takiguchi et al., the machine English translation provided by the examiner being referenced below unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-18, and 20:
Bock exemplifies 100 grams of a commercially available black ink with 1 gram of C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 and carbon black. This gives 1/101 *100% or 0.99 weight% of the C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 in the black ink. It is not clear if the ink is aqueous. It is not clear if the ink contains anionically stabilized black pigment. It is not clear how much black pigment is in the ink. It is clear that carbon black is the pigment. C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 is the second molecular formula of the instant claim 15. It necessarily has the non-polymeric fluorophore properties of the instant claims according to the instant specification, page 38. The carbon black is not described as being anionically stabilized. See Bock, the abstract and paragraphs [0006], [0007], [0009], [0012], [0013], [0014], [0025], [0027], [0028], and [0031]. Bock exemplifies ink with carbon black and slightly less than 1 wt% of the C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 by weight of the entire ink composition, which falls within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore. It is therefore clear that the ordinary skilled artisan is aware of the properties of C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 in the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore in combination with black pigment.
Bock, paragraph [0015], particularly “This includes the decoder substrate being absorbent and hence able to bind water and/or organic liquids in which the marker substance is dissolved.”, indicates that Bock encompasses aqueous inks.
Bock, paragraph [0025], particularly noting the more preferable amounts of 1% to 15% by weight of pigment, discloses pigment amounts which include those of the instant claims.
Bock, paragraph [0007] discloses the use of water-insoluble colorants generally. The specific colorants listed are denoted with “such as” which indicates that they are not limiting. Anionically stabilized pigments are not disclosed.
Bock thereby encompasses the instantly claimed inks except for the use of anionically stabilized pigments.
Takiguchi discloses aqueous inkjet inks containing carbon black pigment and fluorescent whitening agent in an amount of 0.010 to 3.000 wt% based on the wt% of the pigment, which encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore at 6 weight% of pigment of the instant claims and of Takiguchi, page 10, lines 5-7. Note that 3.000 mass% of 6 mass percent of pigment is 0.18 weight% of fluorophore which rounds up to 0.2 weight% fluorophore at the decimal precision required by the instant claims. These amounts of fluorophore and pigment of Takiguchi therefore fall within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts of fluorophore and pigment of the instant claims. Similarly, 6.49 mass% of pigment of Takiguchi, page 10, lines 5-7, gives 0.195 weight percent of fluorophore at 3.000 mass percent thereof of Takiguchi. This also rounds up to 0.2 weight percent fluorophore at the decimal accuracy required by the instant claims. Similarly, 6.49 mass% of pigment rounds down to 6 weight% at the decimal accuracy required by the instant claims. Takiguchi continues to read on pigment and fluorophore amounts within the scope of those of the instant claims.
See Takiguchi, the abstract, page 2, lines 2-6, page 3, lines 16-23, page 4, lines 1-4, page 5, lines 8-13 and lines 13-23, page 6, lines 1-23, page 7, lines 4-23, particularly noting the anionically stabilized pigments of lines 19-23 and the carbon black of lines 11-15, page 8, lines 1-22, noting the anionically stabilized pigments, and lines 19-23, noting the dispersible pigments with anionic groups bonded thereto, page 9, line 23, page 10, lines 1-4, noting that it is not desired to have whitening agent aggregated to pigment for the reasons discussed therein, and page 10, lines 5-23, noting the pigment amounts of lines 5-7, which encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of pigment, and the excitation and emission peak wavelengths of lines 13-17, which falls within the scope of the instantly claimed excitation and emission peak wavelengths, and page 11, lines 1-23, page 12, lines 1-21, particularly noting the C.I. fluorescent Brightener 220 of line 14, which falls within the scope of the non-polymeric fluorophore of the instant claim 1.
Takiguchi, page 13, lines 1-5, particularly line 4, describes a preference for the C.I. fluorescent brightener 220.
It appears that C.I. fluorescent brightener 220 of Bock and Takiguchi necessarily gives the instantly claimed non-polymeric fluorophore properties because it is disclosed as being one of the instantly claimed non-polymeric fluorophores at the instant specification, page 38. See MPEP 2112.
Takiguchi, page 14, lines 14-22 and page 15, lines 1-7 discloses amounts of fluorescent whitening agent based on the amount of pigment, which encompass amounts thereof which fall within the scope of the amounts of the instant claims as discussed above.
Takiguchi, page 16, line 20 to page 17, line 3 describes the benefits of using the particulars of their inks.
Takiguchi, page 15, lines 8-18, discloses the aqueous media of their inks, which encompasses that of the instant claim 15. Takiguchi, page 15, lines 19-23, particularly noting the polyols of lines 21-22, discloses using polyols which are inherently humectants of the instant claim 13, in their inks. The mildew-proof agents of Takiguchi, page 16, line 1, fall within the scope of the biocides of the instant claim 13. The defoamers of Takiguchi, page 15, line 23 and the surfactant of page 16, lines 9-16 fall within the scope of the instant claim 13, noting that surfactants are dispersing agents.
Takiguchi, page 17, lines 6-7, discloses viscosities which fall within the scope of the instant clam 4.
Takiguchi, page 17, line 11 to page 18, line 3 and page 18, line 4 to page 19, line 3 discloses the particulars of the inkjet printer and head cartridge. Also note the figures in the Chinese Takiguchi document.
Takiguchi, page 19, lines 4-22 and page 20, lines 1-2, discloses the use of self-dispersible carbon black. Takiguchi, page 20, lines 3-23 and page 21, lines 1-2 discloses self-dispersible carbon black. These exemplified self-dispersible carbon blacks are anionically stabilized.
Takiguchi, page 21, lines 1-23, particularly lines 9-11, discloses anionically-charged styrene-acrylic copolymer having an acid value of at least 50, which falls within the scope of the instant claims 14 and 15.
See Takiguchi, the examples and discussion of the properties of their examples.
See Takiguchi, page 8, line 16 to page 9, line 20, noting the resin dispersants which can be water-soluble acrylic resin.
The C.I. fluorescent Brightener 220 of Takiguchi, page 12, line 14, falls within the scope of the instant claim 15, the second molecular formula. See the instant specification, page 38.
Takiguchi’s carbon black containing anionic groups falls within the scope of the pigment of the instant claims 1, 9, 11, 15, 16, 18, and 20.
Takiguchi’s fluorophores fall within the scope of those of the instant claims, including the instant claims 1, 5-6, 15, and 16.
The CIE a and b values of Takiguchi, page 27, lines 10-13 fall within the scope of those of the instant claim 2. The black inks of Takiguchi would necessarily require an L* value in the range of the instant claim 2 to be a black ink. The black inks of Takiguchi therefore necessarily and inherently possess the requirements of the instant claim 2. See MPEP 2112.
Takiguchi’s additives discussed above and their anionic polymer dispersant fall within the scope of the instant claim 13
Takiguchi, page 19 of the Japanese Takiguchi document, Fig. 2B describes the inkjet printer from which the black ink of Takiguchi is printed. It is noted that there are multiple recording heads on the head cartridge 36 of Fig. 2B. The head cartridge 36 appears to have 5 slots for ink cartridges, noting the 4 squares and the rectangle on the bottom left of Fig. 2B and the 4 squares and the rectangle towards the top right, just under the section the “36” is connected. This appears to be a standard head cartridge configured to carry multiple cartridges of ink which is typical of most inkjet printers. Takiguchi is silent regarding inksets. However, inkjet printing is taken as implying the use of inksets because the typical inkjet printer is configured to print in multiple colors which typically include at least black, magenta, cyan, and yellow inkjet inks.
Takiguchi does not exemplify the instantly claimed inventions or disclose them with sufficient specificity to anticipate the instant claims, particularly the instantly claimed amounts of pigment and fluorophore.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the inventions of the instant claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-18, and 20 from the disclosures of Bock in view of Takiguchi because they are encompassed by the disclosures of Bock in view of Takiguchi, as discussed above, Bock encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of pigment and non-polymeric fluorophore, as discussed above, Bock and Takiguchi disclose C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 as one of their preferred fluorescent whitening agents, Bock exemplifies the instantly claimed amount of C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 and carbon black such that the ordinary skilled artisan prior to the instantly claimed invention could know what such aqueous ink compositions look like, Bock’s general disclosure encompasses anionically dispersed carbon black though it is not specifically disclosed by Bock, Takiguchi discloses and exemplifies the use of anionically stabilized carbon black, as discussed above, using anionically stabilized carbon black of Takiguchi as the carbon black of Bock would have been expected to give more stable inks having the composition of Bock when the inks of Bock are aqueous, using water as the carrier for Bock’s inks would have been expected to give the benefits that using water as the carrier of Takiguchi’s inks gives to those inks, using the amounts of pigment of Bock, paragraph [0025], which fall within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts of pigment would have been expected to give only predictable color, shade, hue, and chroma, and the combination of anionically stabilized pigments and C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 of Bock and Takiguchi would have been expected to give inks having the properties of the inks of Bock and Takiguchi, including the properties specifically discussed by each of Bock and Takiguchi and the properties inherent to the inks of each of Bock and Takiguchi, decreased flocculation of pigment and fluorescent brightener since the common anionic charges of these compounds would have been expected to cause them to repel each other, and the appearance of the ink of Bock containing C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 and carbon black, including coloring, shading, hues, and chroma which are predictably related to the pigments and fluorophores and their amounts. See MPEP 2144.05, Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024]. It is noted that the appearance of pigmented and dyed inks, including fluorescent inks containing fluorophores, is readily predictable. The ordinary skilled artisan can readily match colors based on their experience and routine experimentation. The examiner notes that artists have been mixing different colorants, including fluorescent colorants, well before the instantly claimed invention. The examiner notes that paint stores have been matching paint colors using spectrometers and databases for many years prior to this invention. Fluorescence adds an additional complication to achieving the desired color, chroma, shade, hue, etc. However, it requires only routine experimentation to arrive at a desired appearance. For examiner one might mix the pigments and fluorophores and arrive at an appearance that is close to what they desire. They can then add additional pigment and/or fluorophore or start again and add less pigment and/or fluorophore to arrive at the appearance they desire. This is merely routine experimentation in the art of mixing colorants, including fluorophores, to arrive at a desired appearance. Furthermore, the reflected and emitted electromagnetic wavelengths add together in a predictable manner to give a predictable appearance. Note that the reference to “emitted electromagnetic wavelengths” includes the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the fluorophore.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi having the particulars of the instant claim 2 because Bock desires and exemplifies black fluorescent inks, the CIE a and b values of Takiguchi, page 27, lines 10-13 fall within the scope of those of the instant claim 2, The black inks of Bock would necessarily require an L* value in the range of the instant claim 2 to be a black ink. The black inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi would have therefore necessarily and inherently been expected to possess the requirements of the instant claim 2. See MPEP 2112.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi having the particulars of the instant claim 4 because Bock does not limit the viscosities of their inks, Takiguchi, page 17, lines 6-7, discloses viscosities which fall within the scope of the instant clam 4, and the inks of Bock having the instantly claimed viscosities of Takiguchi and the instant claim 4 would have been expected to have only predictable properties stemming therefrom such as predictable rates of flow.
Bock’s fluorophores fall within the scope of those of the instant claims, including the instant claims 1, 5-6, 15, and 16.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi having the particulars of the instant claim 12 because Bock’s disclosed amounts of fluorophores and pigments include amounts thereof which fall within the scope of the solids contents of the instant claim 12 and the instantly claimed solids contents would have been expected to give only predictable properties to the ordinary skilled artisan.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi having the particulars of the instant claim 13 because Bock’s use of commercially available inks of undisclosed composition in their examples is taken as evidence that their inks may contain any additives which are typical of inks, Takiguchi, page 15, lines 19-23, particularly noting the polyols of lines 21-22, discloses using polyols which are inherently humectants of the instant claim 13, in their inks, the mildew-proof agents of Takiguchi, page 16, line 1, fall within the scope of the biocides of the instant claim 13, the defoamers of Takiguchi, page 15, line 23 and the surfactant of page 16, lines 9-16 fall within the scope of the instant claim 13, noting that surfactants are dispersing agents, and these conventional ink additives of Takiguchi would have been expected to provide their known functions and properties to the inks of Bock.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi having the anionically-charged styrene-acrylic copolymer of the instant claims 14 and 15 because Bock’s use of commercially available inks of undisclosed composition in their examples is taken as evidence that their inks may contain any additives which are typical of inks, Takiguchi, page 21, lines 1-23, particularly lines 9-11, discloses anionically-charged styrene-acrylic copolymer having an acid value of at least 50, which falls within the scope of the instant claims 14 and 15, and this copolymer would have been expected to contribute its film forming properties, due to it being a polymer, and inherent surfactant/dispersant properties, due to its contents of hydrophiles and hydrophobes, to the inks of Bock.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi having the particulars of the instant claim 15 because Bock’s use of commercially available inks of undisclosed composition in their examples is taken as evidence that their inks may contain any additives which are typical of inks, Takiguchi, page 15, lines 8-18, discloses the aqueous media of their inks, which encompasses that of the instant claim 15, and such aqueous media would have been expected to give only predictable results to the inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi.
There is no showing of any unexpected result stemming from the newly limited amounts of pigment and/or non-polymeric fluorophore which is commensurate in scope with the instant claims and which compares to the closest prior art, e.g. Bock for Takiguchi. See MPEP 716.02(d) Unexpected Results Commensurate in Scope With Claimed Invention [R-08.2012].
The above discussed inks of Takiguchi in view of Bock would have given only predictable properties to the ordinary skilled artisan prior to the instantly claimed invention, including predictable colors, chromas, shades, hues, and pigment stabilities.
Regarding the ink set limitations of the instant claims 16-18 and 20:
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the non-fluorescent inks of the ink sets inherently encompassed by Takiguchi’s inkjet inks and inkjet printers using the anionically stabilized pigments of Takiguchi because anionically stabilized pigment is known to give better coloring properties, such as those discussed at Takiguchi, page 3, lines 1-11 with the increased stability given by the anionic groups of Takiguchi’s anionically stabilized, exemplified pigments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the ink sets inherently encompassed by Takiguchi’s inkjet inks and inkjet printers which contain the above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi because such inkjet sets would have been expected to give the ability to apply the inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi with the convenience and accuracy of inkjet printing.
3. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Application Publication No. 2008/0163777 Bock et al. in view of CN 112094536 Takiguchi et al., the machine English translation provided by the examiner being referenced below unless otherwise noted, and further in view of JP 04-057861 Saito, the machine English translation provided by the examiner being referenced below unless otherwise noted.
The entire discussion of paragraph 2 above is repeated here.
Regarding claim 10:
Takiguchi does not disclose using the dye of the instant claim 10 in their black inks.
Saito discloses using the combination of carbon black and water-soluble black dye in aqueous inkjet inks to give the improvements discussed in their abstract and throughout their disclosure. See Saito, the abstract, page 4, lines 16-18, page 5, lines 1-7, page 7, lines 1-10, page 11, lines 22-23, page 12, lines 1-21, particularly noting that the dye is water soluble and the amounts of lines 17-18, and the remainder of the document. The amounts of dye of Saito’s claims 2 and 8 fall within the scope of the instant claim 10.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to add the instantly claimed amounts of black water-soluble dye to the black inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi, which are discussed above, because it is known in the art, as taught by Saito, to add dye to pigmented inks to improve the color qualities of the printed image and the improvements obtained by Saito from using their combinations of carbon black and black dye would have been expected in the black inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi which contain black water-soluble dye also.
4. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 112094539 Takiguchi et al., the machine English translation provided by the examiner being referenced below unless otherwise noted, in view of US Pat. Application Publication No. 2008/0163777 Bock et al.
Regarding claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-18, and 20:
Takiguchi discloses aqueous inkjet inks containing carbon black pigment and fluorescent whitening agent in an amount of 0.010 to 3.000 wt% based on the wt% of the pigment, which encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore at 6 weight% of pigment of the instant claims and of Takiguchi, page 10, lines 5-7. Note that 3.000 mass% of 6 mass percent of pigment is 0.18 weight% of fluorophore which rounds up to 0.2 weight% fluorophore within the decimal precision required by the instant claims. These amounts of fluorophore and pigment of Takiguchi therefore fall within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts of fluorophore and pigment of the instant claims. Similarly, 6.49 mass% of pigment of Takiguchi, page 10, lines 5-7, gives 0.195 weight percent of fluorophore at 3.000 mass percent thereof of Takiguchi. This also rounds up to 0.2 weight percent fluorophore within the decimal accuracy required by the instant claims. Similarly, 6.49 mass% of pigment rounds down to 6 weight% within the decimal accuracy required by the instant claims. Takiguchi continues to read on pigment and fluorophore amounts within the scope of those of the instant claims.
See Takiguchi, the abstract, page 2, lines 2-6, page 3, lines 16-23, page 4, lines 1-4, page 5, lines 8-13 and lines 13-23, page 6, lines 1-23, page 7, lines 4-23, particularly noting the anionically stabilized pigments of lines 19-23 and the carbon black of lines 11-15, page 8, lines 1-22, noting the anionically stabilized pigments, and lines 19-23, noting the dispersible pigments with anionic groups bonded thereto, page 9, line 23, page 10, lines 1-4, noting that it is not desired to have whitening agent aggregated to pigment for the reasons discussed therein, and page 10, lines 5-23, noting the pigment amounts of lines 5-7, which encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of pigment, and the excitation and emission peak wavelengths of lines 13-17, which falls within the scope of the instantly claimed excitation and emission peak wavelengths, and page 11, lines 1-23, page 12, lines 1-21, particularly noting the C.I. fluorescent Brightener 220 of line 14, which falls within the scope of the non-polymeric fluorophore of the instant claim 1.
Takiguchi, page 13, lines 1-5, particularly line 4, describes a preference for the C.I. fluorescent brightener 220.
It appears that C.I. fluorescent brightener 220 necessarily gives the instantly claimed non-polymeric fluorophore properties because it is disclosed as being one of the instantly claimed non-polymeric fluorophores at the instant specification, page 38. See MPEP 2112.
Takiguchi, page 14, lines 14-22 and page 15, lines 1-7 discloses amounts of fluorescent whitening agent based on the amount of pigment, which encompass amounts thereof which fall within the scope of the amounts of the instant claims as discussed above.
Takiguchi, page 16, line 20 to page 17, line 3 describes the benefits of using the particulars of their inks.
Takiguchi, page 15, lines 8-18, discloses the aqueous media of their inks, which encompasses that of the instant claim 15. Takiguchi, page 15, lines 19-23, particularly noting the polyols of lines 21-22, discloses using polyols which are inherently humectants of the instant claim 13, in their inks. The mildew-proof agents of Takiguchi, page 16, line 1, fall within the scope of the biocides of the instant claim 13. The defoamers of Takiguchi, page 15, line 23 and the surfactant of page 16, lines 9-16 fall within the scope of the instant claim 13, noting that surfactants are dispersing agents.
Takiguchi, page 17, lines 6-7, discloses viscosities which fall within the scope of the instant clam 4.
Takiguchi, page 17, line 11 to page 18, line 3 and page 18, line 4 to page 19, line 3 discloses the particulars of the inkjet printer and head cartridge. Also note the figures in the Chinese Takiguchi document.
Takiguchi, page 19, lines 4-22, discloses the use of self-dispersible carbon black at page 20, lines 1-2. Takiguchi, page 20, lines 3-23 and page 21, lines 1-2 discloses self-dispersible carbon black. These exemplified self-dispersible carbon blacks are anionically stabilized.
Takiguchi, page 21, lines 1-23, particularly lines 9-11, discloses anionically-charged styrene-acrylic copolymer having an acid value of at least 50, which falls within the scope of the instant claims 14 and 15.
See Takiguchi, the examples and discussion of the properties of their examples.
See Takiguchi, page 8, line 16 to page 9, line 20, noting the resin dispersants which can be water-soluble acrylic resin.
The C.I. fluorescent Brightener 220 of Takiguchi, page 12, line 14, falls within the scope of the instant claim 15, the second molecular formula. See the instant specification, page 38.
Takiguchi’s carbon black containing anionic groups falls within the scope of the pigment of the instant claims 1, 9, 11, 15, 16, 18, and 20.
Takiguchi’s fluorophores fall within the scope of those of the instant claims 1, 5-6, 15, and 16.
The CIE a and b values of Takiguchi, page 27, lines 10-13 fall within the scope of those of the instant claim 2. The black inks of Takiguchi would necessarily require an L* value in the range of the instant claim 2 to be a black ink. The black inks of Takiguchi therefore necessarily and inherently possess the requirements of the instant claim 2. See MPEP 2112.
Takiguchi’s additives discussed above and their anionic polymer dispersant fall within the scope of the instant claim 13.
Takiguchi, page 19 of the Japanese Takiguchi document, Fig. 2B describes the inkjet printer from which the black ink of Takiguchi is printed. It is noted that there are multiple recording heads on the head cartridge 36 of Fig. 2B. The head cartridge 36 appears to have 5 slots for ink cartridges, noting the 4 squares and the rectangle on the bottom left of Fig. 2B and the 4 squares and the rectangle towards the top right, just under the section the “36” is connected. This appears to be a standard head cartridge configured to carry multiple cartridges of ink which is typical of most inkjet printers. Takiguchi is silent regarding inksets. However, inkjet printing is taken as implying the use of inksets because the typical inkjet printer is configured to print in multiple colors which typically include at least black, magenta, cyan, and yellow inkjet inks.
Takiguchi does not exemplify the instantly claimed inventions or disclose them with sufficient specificity to anticipate the instant claims, particularly the instantly claimed amounts of pigment and fluorophore.
Bock exemplifies 100 grams of a commercially available black ink with 1 gram of C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 and carbon black. This gives 1/101 *100% or 0.99 weight% of the C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 in the black ink. It is not clear if the ink is aqueous. It is not clear if the ink contains anionically stabilized black pigment. It is not clear how much black pigment is in the ink. It is clear that carbon black is the pigment. C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 is the second molecular formula of the instant claim 15. It necessarily has the non-polymeric fluorophore properties of the instant claims according to the instant specification, page 38. The carbon black is not described as being anionically stabilized. See Bock, the abstract and paragraphs [0006], [0007], [0009], [0012], [0013], [0014], [0025], [0027], [0028], and [0031]. Bock exemplifies ink with carbon black and slightly less than 1 wt% of the C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 by weight of the entire ink composition, which falls within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore. It is therefore clear that the ordinary skilled artisan is aware of the properties of C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 in the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore in combination with black pigment.
Bock, paragraph [0015], particularly “This includes the decoder substrate being absorbent and hence able to bind water and/or organic liquids in which the marker substance is dissolved.”, indicates that Bock encompasses aqueous inks.
Bock, paragraph [0025], particularly noting the more preferable amounts of 1% to 15% by weight of pigment, discloses pigment amounts which include those of the instant claims.
Bock, paragraph [0007] discloses the use of water-insoluble colorants generally. The specific colorants listed are denoted with “such as” which indicates that they are not limiting. Anionically stabilized pigments are not disclosed.
Bock thereby encompasses the instantly claimed inks except for the use of anionically stabilized pigments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the inventions of the instant claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-18, and 20 from the disclosure of Takiguchi because they are encompassed by the disclosure of Takiguchi, as discussed above, Takiguchi encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of pigment and non-polymeric fluorophore, as discussed above, Takiguchi, page 13, lines 1-5, discloses C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 as one of their preferred fluorescent whitening agents, Bock exemplifies C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 and carbon black such that the ordinary skilled artisan prior to the instantly claimed invention could know what such aqueous ink compositions look like, and the combination of anionically stabilized pigments and C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 of Takiguchi would have been expected to give inks having the properties of the inks of Takiguchi, including the properties specifically discussed by Takiguchi and the properties inherent to the inks of Takiguchi, decreased flocculation of pigment and fluorescent brightener since the common anionic charges of these compounds would have been expected to cause them to repel each other, and the appearance of the ink of Bock containing C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 and carbon black, including coloring, shading, hues, and chroma which are predictably related to the pigments and fluorophores and their amounts. See MPEP 2144.05, Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024]. It is noted that the appearance of pigmented and dyed inks, including fluorescent inks containing fluorophores, is readily predictable. The ordinary skilled artisan can readily match colors based on their experience and routine experimentation. The examiner notes that he learned to make purple aqueous paint by mixing read and blue paints in kindergarten. The examiner notes that artists have been matching paint colors for centuries. The examiner notes that paint stores have been matching paint colors using spectrometers and databases for many years prior to this invention. The examiner used to match colors of paints by eye when he worked at Montgomery Wards in the early 1980s. Fluorescence adds an additional complication to achieving the desired color, chroma, shade, hue, etc. However, it requires only routine experimentation to arrive at a desired appearance. For examiner one might mix the pigments and fluorophores and arrive at an appearance that is close to what they desire. They can then add additional pigment and/or fluorophore or start again and add less pigment and/or fluorophore to arrive at the appearance they desire. This is merely routine experimentation. Furthermore, the reflected and emitted electromagnetic wavelengths add together in a predictable manner to give a predictable appearance. Note that the reference to “emitted electromagnetic wavelengths” includes the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the fluorophore.
There is no showing of any unexpected result stemming from the newly limited amounts of pigment and/or non-polymeric fluorophore which is commensurate in scope with the instant claims and which compares to the closest prior art, e.g. Takiguchi. See MPEP 716.02(d) Unexpected Results Commensurate in Scope With Claimed Invention [R-08.2012].
The above discussed inks of Takiguchi in view of Bock would have given only predictable properties to the ordinary skilled artisan prior to the instantly claimed invention, including predictable colors, chromas, shades, hues, and pigment stabilities.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to make the non-fluorescent inks of the ink sets inherently encompassed by Takiguchi’s inkjet inks and inkjet printers because pigment is known to give better coloring properties, such as those discussed at Takiguchi, page 3, lines 1-11.
5. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 112094536 Takiguchi et al., the machine English translation provided by the examiner being referenced below unless otherwise noted, in view of US Pat. Application Publication No. 2008/0163777 Bock et al., and further in view of JP 04-057861 Saito, the machine English translation provided by the examiner being referenced below unless otherwise noted.
The entire discussion of paragraph 4 above is repeated here.
Regarding claim 10:
Takiguchi in view of Bock does not disclose using the dye of the instant claim 10 in their black inks.
Saito discloses using the combination of carbon black and water-soluble black dye in aqueous inkjet inks to give the improvements discussed in their abstract and throughout their disclosure. See Saito, the abstract, page 4, lines 16-18, page 5, lines 1-7, page 7, lines 1-10, page 11, lines 22-23, page 12, lines 1-21, particularly noting that the dye is water soluble and the amounts of lines 17-18, and the remainder of the document. The amounts of dye of Saito’s claims 2 and 8 fall within the scope of the instant claim 10.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the instantly claimed invention to add the instantly claimed amounts of black water-soluble dye to the black inks of Takiguchi which are discussed above because it is known in the art, as taught by Saito,
to add dye to pigmented inks to improve the color qualities of the printed image and the improvements obtained by Saito from using their combinations of carbon black and black dye would have been expected in the black inks of Takiguchi which contain black water-soluble dye also.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
6. The following response is in reply to the applicant’s arguments as they apply to the rejections of paragraphs 2-5 above:
In their response of 7/17/25:
The applicant argues “Applicants submit that the teaching of fluorophores in Takiguchi et al. is very generic as shown in the teaching in [0026] to [0033].” This ignores Takiguchi’s preference for a small group of fluorophores at page 13, lines 1-5. The C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 thereof falls within the scope of the instant claims.
The applicant argues “It would require hundreds of hours by scientists skilled in the art of inkjet printing to hopefully find and use to advantage the three specific compounds recited in amended Claims 1, 15, and 16.” This carries only the weight of attorney argument. See MPEP 2145. The examiner graduated from college in 1990. He was taught that companies use automated assaying equipment to make molecules and compositions in large quantities. Such automated assaying equipment would have been expected to get even better since 1990. With such equipment, it would not take long to make the compositions of Takiguchi’s ingredients. Furthermore, Takiguchi’s list of preferred fluorophores is relatively small and would not take very long. The applicant’s arguments ignore these preferences of Takiguchi. It is noted that hundreds of hours includes only about 9 days. It is therefore not seen that “hundreds of hours” is necessarily a long time. It is not seen that this argument overcomes the above prima facie case of obviousness by any legal standard. The above rejection meets the requirements of “KSR” and Graham v. Deere. This argument is therefore not persuasive.
The applicant argues “While one or more of Applicants’ non- polymeric fluorophores may be buried in the generic boilerplate of Takiguchi et al., such teaching provides no direction in this teaching to lead Applicants or others of ordinary skill in the inkjet printing art, to the three specific compounds recited in their amended claims to achieve the results they describe in their working examples beginning on page 36. Thus, Applicants’ specific selection of the recited non-polymeric fluorophores is not taught or | suggested in the considerable details of a very generic disclosure of scores of possible | fluorescent brightener compounds encompassed by Takiguchi et al. | Thus, Applicants believe that the presently claimed invention is patentable over the | generic teaching of Takiguchi et al. and this unpatentability rejection should be withdrawn.” The preference for C.I. Fluorescent Brightener 220 of Takiguchi, page 13, lines 1-5 and the small list of preferred fluorophores therein counters these arguments. These arguments are therefore not persuasive.
The applicant argues “Rejection II: Claim 10 is directed to the inclusion of a black dye in the aqueous colored pigment- | based ink of Claim 1, now amended. While Applicants respectfully traverse this unpatentability rejection on the merits, they also submit that Claim 10 is patentable over the combination of Takiguchi et al. with Saito et al. because Claim 10 is dependent from patentable Claim 1 (for reasons provided above). Thus, this unpatentability rejection should be withdrawn.” For the reasons stated above, the examiner disagrees.
In their response of 1/6/26 and 12/18/25:
The applicant argues “Applicants respectfully disagree on the merits, but in order to expedite prosecution to allowance of the present application, they have amended the independent Claims 1, 15, and 16 of the present application to recite the amounts of pigment colorant as being at least 3 weight % and up to and including 6 weight %, and the non-polymeric fluorophore to be
present in an amount of at least 0.2 weight % and up to and including 2 weight %.
These amounts are based, according to Claim 1, on the total weight of the aqueous
colored pigment-based ink that is capable of fluorescence.
Another way to define the amounts of these two essential components of the claimed
aqueous pigment-based ink that is capable of fluorescent, is to consider the weight ratios of
non-polymeric fluorophore to pigment colorant.” As noted in the above rejection, Takiguchi encompasses the newly recited amounts. This argument is not persuasive therefore.
The applicant argues “Simple division of the recited respective lower and upper end weight % points of the non-polymeric fluorophore to the pigment colorant define those weight ratios to span 0.0333 to 0.667, which, when converted to weight % of non-polymeric fluorophore based on the weight % of pigment colorant spans the range of 3.33 weight % to 66.7 weight % for the non-polymeric fluorophore.
This calculation is made because Takiguchi et al. consistently teaches that the amount
of fluorescent whitening agent that the Office Action equates to Applicants' non-polymeric
fluorophore, is present in an amount of 0.010% to 3.000% based on the content (%) of the
pigment, which the Office Action equates to Applicants' pigment colorant. This teaching is
stated at least 3 times: lines 10-13 on page 5; lines 8-11 on page 6; and page 14 (line 14) to
page 15 (line 2). Most importantly, the teaching on pages 6 and 14 stipulate that the amount
of fluorescent whitening agent cannot be less than 0.010% nor more than 3.000% because
outside of the noted range, either the intensity of fluorescence is too low relative to the
absorption of the pigment (therefore, too difficult to obtain an image with good hue), or the
intensity of fluorescence is too high relative to the absorption strength of the pigment
(thereby blocking light of the pigment).” Takiguchi discloses aqueous inkjet inks containing carbon black pigment and fluorescent whitening agent in an amount of 0.010 to 3.000 wt% based on the wt% of the pigment, which encompasses the instantly claimed amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore at 6 weight% of pigment of the instant claims and of Takiguchi, page 10, lines 5-7. Note that 3.000 mass% of 6 mass% of pigment is 0.18 weight% of fluorophore which rounds up to 0.2 weight% fluorophore at the decimal precision required by the instant claims. These amounts of fluorophore and pigment of Takiguchi therefore fall within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts of fluorophore and pigment of the instant claims. Similarly, 6.49 mass% of pigment of Takiguchi, page 10, lines 5-7, gives 0.195 weight percent of fluorophore at 3.000 mass percent thereof of Takiguchi. This also rounds up to 0.2 weight percent fluorophore at the decimal accuracy required by the instant claims. Similarly, 6.49 mass% of pigment rounds down to 6 weight% at the decimal accuracy required by the instant claims. Takiguchi continues to read on pigment and fluorophore amounts within the scope of those of the instant claims.
This argument is not persuasive regarding the above new ground of rejection.
The applicant argues “Takiguchi et al. then states in lines 1-2 of page 15 that "[a]s a result, it is believed that images with high optical concentrations are difficult to obtain." The Takiguchi et al. researchers obviously realized that finding the relationship of fluorophore (fluorescent
whitening agent) and pigment to achieve their meet their desired needs is very critical to
performance but difficult to accomplish.” The amounts of fluorophore and pigment encompassed by Takiguchi which fall within the scope of the instant claims meet this requirement of Takiguchi. Furthermore, in the Bock in view of Takiguchi rejection above, this is not required.
The applicant argues “One must also note that the lower and upper
endpoints taught in Takiguchi et al. are stated using 4 significant figures. Takiguchi et al. is
teaching a skilled worker to not take liberty with the amounts by rounding or otherwise using
amounts outside the noted range, in order to obtain the desired results. Thus, the stated limits
for the fluorescent whitening agent in Takiguchi et al. are exact limits.” However, the instant claims are not stated with such decimal accuracy. Therefore, rounding the values actually used by Takiguchi gives values within the instantly claimed decimal accuracy. This does not require changing the amounts which are actually disclosed by Takiguchi. This argument of the applicant does not apply to this rejection rationale therefore.
The applicant argues “With this teaching of Takiguchi et al. in mind, Applicants respectfully submit that the presently claimed invention is not taught or suggested by this explicit teaching and interpretation of Takiguchi et al. As pointed out above, Applicants' weight ratios of non-
polymeric fluorophore to pigment colorant are significantly different, i.e., high higher (3.33%
to 66.7%) and purposely so, in order to ensure that the inkjet-printed images can be suitably
dense in the absence of UV illumination but yet stand out well from the background when
UV illumination is used. The higher weight ratios are thus needed because the pigment
colorant will naturally absorb some of the UV irradiation when it is used and this effect must
be overcome to obtain desired fluorescence. Applicants have also stated in their application
that the composition of the presently claimed invention provides high density images with
greater resistance to smearing (see page 7, lines 3ff).” The portions of the disclosure of Takiguchi which encompass the instantly claimed amounts of fluorophore and pigment, as discussed above, meet the instantly claimed amounts of fluorophore and pigment within their claimed decimal accuracies, as discussed above. This argument is therefore not persuasive. Furthermore, the above rejection based on Bock in view of Takiguchi further encompasses the instantly claimed pigment amounts and fluorophore amounts. This argument is not persuasive regarding that rejection either.
The applicant argues “Takiguchi et al. clearly teaches away from Applicants' much higher amounts of non-polymeric fluorophore relative to the pigment colorant. Moreover, while Bock et al. may teach specific non-polymeric fluorophores and pigments (carbon black), it does not remedy the teaching lacking in Takiguchi et al. about higher weight ratios.” This is not correct for those amounts of pigment and fluorophore which read on the instant claims within the scope of the instantly claimed decimal accuracies, as noted in the above rejection. This argument is therefore not persuasive. Furthermore, the above rejection based on Bock in view of Takiguchi further encompasses the instantly claimed pigment amounts and fluorophore amounts. This argument is not persuasive regarding that rejection either.
The applicant argues “Takiguchi et al. also calls for the amount of the fluorescing whitening agent in the ink to be 0.0003 weight % to 0.09 weight %, based on the total weight of the ink (page 15, lines 3-4). Applicants' recited amount of non-polymeric fluorophore is more than this (at least 22 times more), i.e., at least 0.2 to and including 2 weight %, when based on the total weight of the "ink" (aqueous colored pigment-based ink.” These argued amounts of Takiguchi are preferred amounts. Note Takiguchi, page 15, line 3, particularly “preferably”. Preferred amounts do not teach away from the broader teachings of Takiguchi which encompass the instantly claimed amounts of pigment and fluorophore as discussed in the above rejection.
The applicant argues “Thus, Applicants composition is critically different from the ink taught in Takiguchi et al., with or without Boch et al., in both the amount of non-polymeric fluorophore, based on the total weight of the composition and in the weight relationship of the non-polymeric
fluorophore to the pigment colorant. Nothing in either cited reference hints or suggests such
a combination of materials, and Takiguchi fails to provide a prima facie teaching of the
combination and actually teaches away from it in both respects.” The examiner disagrees based on the amounts of Takiguchi’s pigments and fluorophores which fall within the scope of the instantly claimed amounts within the scope of the instantly claimed decimal accuracies. Furthermore, the above Bock in view of Takiguchi rejection gives the instantly claimed pigment and fluorophore amounts such that none of the above arguments regarding fluorophore amounts are persuasive regarding that rejection.
The applicant argues “For these reasons, the unpatentability Rejection I based on the combination of Takiguchi et al. and Bock et al. should be withdrawn in view of the proposed amendments to Claims 1, 15, and 16.” For the reasons stated above, the reasons stated in the above rejections, and for the full teachings of the above cited prior art, the examiner disagrees.
The applicant argues “While Applicants respectfully traverse this unpatentability rejection on the merits, they also submit that Claim 10 is patentable over the combination of Takiguchi et al.
with Bock et al. and Saito et al. because Claim 10 is dependent from patentable Claim 1 (for
reasons provided above) and the combination of Claim 10 and Claim 1 is not taught in the
combined art. Thus, this unpatentability rejection should be withdrawn.” For the reasons stated above, the examiner disagrees.
There is no showing of any unexpected result stemming from the newly limited amounts of pigment and/or non-polymeric fluorophore which is commensurate in scope with the instant claims and which compares to the closest prior art, e.g. Bock for pigment and fluorophore amounts and Takiguchi for anionically stabilized pigments. See MPEP 716.02(d) Unexpected Results Commensurate in Scope With Claimed Invention [R-08.2012].
The above discussed inks of Bock in view of Takiguchi would have given only predictable properties to the ordinary skilled artisan prior to the instantly claimed invention, including predictable colors, chromas, shades, hues, and pigment stabilities.
The applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the reasons stated above, the reasons stated in the above rejection, and for the full teachings of the above cited prior art as they would have been understood by the ordinary skilled artisan prior to the instantly claimed invention. The above rejection is therefore made over the applicant’s arguments.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK D NILAND whose telephone number is (571)272-1121. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 10 to 5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert S Jones, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-1121. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/PATRICK D NILAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762