DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks filed 2026-07-17, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) stated in the previous office action (final rejection dated 2026-04-29) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, as discussed in the telephonic interview held 2026-07-16, a preference for the average circularity of the toner is stated in the as-filed specification, supporting that limitation in Claim 1 as recited in the amendment filed 2026-02-27. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) of Claims 1, 4 – 7, and 9 - 12 has been withdrawn. However, an updated rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 is presented below, which reflects a teaching by Shibata of a preferred average circularity of the toner.
A response to Applicant’s arguments filed alongside claim amendments 2026-02-27 was included in the previous office action. Since the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) is withdrawn, and an updated rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 is presented below, those arguments are restated here.
In response to the rejection of Claims 1, 4 – 7, and 9 - 11 under 35 U.S.C. §103 over Sugawara in view of Suzuki, further in view of Shibata (non-final rejection dated 2025-12-11), Applicant offers a discussion of the limitation of new Claim 12. Therein, Applicant asserts that the low exposure ratio of the release agent at the surface of the toner particles represents an unexpected result, and ties the exposure ratio to the surface uniformity of the toner particles. However, “surface uniformity” is not well defined in Applicant’s arguments, and does not appear in either the claim language or the as-filed Specification. One of ordinary skill in the art would most likely take “surface uniformity” to be related to the smoothness of the surface of the toner particle, which may be reflected by the circularity of the toner. As detailed below, that interpretation does not relate to a measured property of the disclosed preparative examples, and therefore cannot constitute an unexpected result. Alternatively, “surface uniformity” could plausibly be related to the exposure of release agent at the surface of the toner particle. In that case, “surface uniformity” would be well represented by the Releasing agent surface exposure ratio (area %) reported in the Table (Specification, page 83). As discussed in the prior response to Applicant’s arguments (non-final rejection dated 2025-12-11), Sugawara teaches suppression of exposure of the release agent at the surface of the toner particles. Further, from the rejection which followed that discussion: “Sugawara teaches that the release agent is preferably incorporated into the central particles ([0043]), meaning the core portion of the toner.” “Sugawara teaches that the shell layer of the toner effectively prevents the release agent from being exposed at the surface of the toner particles ([0091]).” These teachings lead to an exposure ratio by area of the release agent at the surface of the toner particle approaching 0%. Therefore, “surface uniformity” interpreted as minimization of exposure of the release agent at the surface of the toner particle also could not constitute an unexpected result.
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, 4 – 7, and 9 - 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara et al (US PGP 2012/0070772) in view of Suzuki et al (US PGP 2010/0183969), further in view of Shibata et al (US PGP 2012/0040185).
Sugawara teaches a toner produced by aggregation of a liquid dispersion of a binder resin ([0069]). In addition, Sugawara teaches that it is preferable that a release agent dispersion be present alongside the resin dispersion in the aggregation step ([0070]). The toner of Sugawara has a core-shell structure, and the shell layer is added onto the core in a step of aggregating shell resin onto the aggregated core particles ([0071]). Sugawara teaches a fusing step, following the aggregation steps, which results in coalescence of the entire core-shell particle ([0077]).
Sugawara describes the preparation of example toner (1) ([0254]). The core composition for aggregating the cores of the toner particles contains 650 parts of water, 367 parts of polyester resin liquid dispersion (1), 50 parts of cyan pigment liquid dispersion, and 100 parts of release agent liquid dispersion ([0255] – [0259]). Polyester resin liquid dispersion (1) has a solid content of 30% ([0198]). Cyan pigment liquid dispersion has a solid content of 20% ([0249]). Release agent liquid dispersion has a solid content of 20% ([0253]). Therefore, the core composition for aggregating core particles, has a solid content of 12%.
367
p
o
l
y
e
s
t
e
r
*
0.3
+
50
c
y
a
n
*
0.2
+
100
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
*
0.2
650
w
a
t
e
r
+
367
p
o
l
y
e
s
t
e
r
+
50
c
y
a
n
+
100
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
*
100
%
=
12
%
The mixture just described is subjected to aggregation ([0265] – [0266]), resulting in an aqueous dispersion of aggregated core particles analogous to dispersion A of the instant application. This dispersion would necessarily also have a solid content of 12%.
A shell composition containing polyester resin liquid dispersion (1) ([0263]) is then added, forming a shell layer on the core particles ([0267]). This shell composition, analogous to dispersion B of the instant application, being composed of polyester resin liquid dispersion (1), would thus have a solid content of 30%. In a later step, the core-shell structured particles are heated to 90°C for 3 hours in a fusing step ([0268]).
Sugawara teaches that the release agent is preferably incorporated into the central particle ([0043]), meaning the core portion of the toner. Sugawara also teaches that when breakage of the toner is suppressed, so is exposure of the release agent at the surface of the toner ([0060]), indicating that the release agent is not substantially exposed at the surface of an intact toner particle. This also imparts excellent charge characteristics to the toner ([0060]). Further, Sugawara teaches that the shell layer of the toner effectively prevents the release agent from being exposed at the surface of the toner particle ([0091]). Therefore, while Sugawara does not teach a preferred exposure ratio of the release agent at the surface of the toner particle, such a toner would necessarily possess a very low value for such a measure, reading on the inequality stated in Claim 1.
Sugawara does not appear to teach a rate of addition of resin particle dispersion for the shell layer to the aggregated core particles. Sugawara also does not appear to teach a preferred relationship between the solid component concentrations of the shell composition and the core composition.
Suzuki teaches a toner which may have a core-shell structure ([0088], [0111]). Suzuki teaches that the rate of addition of shelling resin particles to aggregated core particles may vary with the ratio of the sizes (or volume-average particle diameters) of the core particles and the shelling resin particles ([0124]). Namely, when the ratio is 10 or more, the rate of addition of shelling resin should be smaller. Suzuki further teaches that controlling the rate of addition of shelling resin to core particles achieves a narrow resulting particle size distribution ([0123]). More specifically, Suzuki teaches that when the core particles have a volume-average diameter of 2 – 6 µm, and the shelling resin particles have a volume-average diameter of 120 – 180 nm, then the rate of addition of shelling resin particles to the aggregated cores is preferably 0.01 – 3 parts by mass per minute, with respect to 100 parts of core particles ([0123]).
As discussed above, the solid content concentration of Sugawara’s core composition is 12%, which will be substantially the same concentration of core particles in said composition. In nominal terms, Sugawara’s core composition contains 140 parts by mass of solids (which is essentially the amount of core particles) in a total of 1,167 parts of core particles dispersion.
In order to add shelling resin particles dispersion to the core particles dispersion at the rate in terms of solids taught by Suzuki, 0.014 – 4.2 parts of shelling resin particles per 100 parts of core particles per minute would be added.
0.01
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
100
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
*
m
i
n
u
t
e
*
140
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
=
0.014
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
3
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
100
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
*
m
i
n
u
t
e
*
140
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
=
4.2
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
Where the shelling resin particle dispersion has a solid content concentration of 30%, 0.047 – 14 parts per minute of shelling resin particle dispersion would thus be added.
0.014
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
*
100
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
i
o
n
30
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
=
0.047
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
i
o
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
4.2
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
*
100
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
i
o
n
30
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
n
=
14
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
i
o
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
This corresponds to a range of 0.004 – 1.2 parts of shelling resin dispersion per 100 parts of core particles dispersion per minute.
0.047
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
.
m
i
n
u
t
e
*
100
1,167
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
d
i
s
p
.
=
0.004
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
.
100
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
d
i
s
p
.
*
m
i
n
u
t
e
14
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
.
m
i
n
u
t
e
*
100
1,167
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
d
i
s
p
.
=
1.2
p
a
r
t
s
s
h
e
l
l
i
n
g
d
i
s
p
.
100
p
a
r
t
s
c
o
r
e
s
d
i
s
p
.
*
m
i
n
u
t
e
Suzuki does not appear to teach a preferred relationship between the solid component concentrations of the shell composition and the core composition, or a preferred solid component concentration of the shell composition.
Shibata teaches a process of preparing a core-shell toner, comprising steps of agglomerating core particles containing at least resin (1), and adding a dispersion of resin (2) to the prepared core particles to form a shell layer (Abstract). Shibata teaches that the solid component concentration of the dispersion for agglomerating core particles is preferably 5 – 40% by mass ([0075]). This would result in a dispersion of core particles having roughly the same solids concentration. Shibata also teaches that the solid component concentration of the resin (2) dispersion for forming a shell layer is preferably 5 – 50% by mass ([0101]). This keeps the addition of shelling resin from too strongly affecting the temperature or concentration of the overall system, and from allowing particles of resin (2) to form new aggregates independently of the core particles. These ranges allow for the difference in solid component concentrations of the shelling resin dispersion and the aggregated core particles dispersion to lie in the range stated in Claim 1. In addition, Shibata teaches a preferred average circularity for the toner of 0.90 – 0.99 ([0116]), overlapping the range stated in Claim 1.
In seeking to prepare the toner of Sugawara with a narrow size distribution of particles, a practitioner of ordinary skill would have been motivated to control the rate of addition of shelling resin to core particles as taught by Suzuki. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to control the rate of addition of polyester resin particle liquid dispersion (1) (analogous to dispersion B) to the aggregated core particles (analogous to dispersion A) at a rate in terms of solids as taught by Suzuki, which would inherently result in an addition rate in terms of dispersion liquids lying in a range encompassing that stated in Claim 1. In addition, lacking guidance from Sugawara and Suzuki as to preferred ranges of solid component concentrations of the aggregated core particle dispersion and the shelling resin dispersion, one of ordinary skill in the art would have looked to the prior art for acceptable ranges. In conforming to the ranges taught by Shibata, the skilled practitioner would have, in the course of routine experimentation, added a shelling resin dispersion to a core particles dispersion wherein the difference in the solid content concentrations of those dispersions lied in the range stated in Claim 1. Further, the toner of Sugawara is prepared by a method wherein a core particle is formed by aggregating at least a binder resin and release agent dispersion; a shell layer is formed on the core particles by aggregating a resin dispersion having a greater solid content than the core particles dispersion just prepared; and the toner particles are fused and coalesced, the same as the method described by Claim 1.
As stated above, the solid content of the aggregated core particles dispersion in the preparative example of Sugawara is 12%, lying in the range stated in Claim 4.
As stated above, the solid content of the shell resin particle dispersion in the preparative example of Sugawara is 30%, lying in the range stated in Claim 5.
The aggregated core particles of Sugawara’s example toner (1) have a volume-average particle diameter of 5.0 µm, or 5,000 nm, lying in the range stated in Claim 6.
As stated above, the aggregated core particles of example toner (1) have a volume-average particle diameter of 5,000 nm. The polyester resin particle liquid dispersion (1) (used for the shell resin) has a volume-average particle diameter of 160 nm ([0198]). Therefore, the ratio of these two diameters is 31.25, lying in the range stated in Claim 7.
5,000
n
m
a
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
d
c
o
r
e
s
160
n
m
p
o
l
y
e
s
t
e
r
r
e
s
i
n
d
i
s
p
.
=
31.25
As stated above, the polyester resin particles of polyester resin particles dispersion (1) (used as the shell resin) have a volume-average particle diameter of 160 nm, and a solid content of 30%. Therefore, the ratio of those two values (nm / %) is 5.3, lying in the range stated in Claim 9.
160
n
m
d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
30
%
s
o
l
i
d
s
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
=
5.3
The method preparing a toner of Sugawara as discussed above, which is described by Claim 1, results in toner (1), satisfying Claim 10.
As discussed in the treatment of Claim 1 above, the addition rate of the shelling resin dispersion, analogous to instant dispersion B, to the core particles dispersion, analogous to instant dispersion A, inherently lies in the range of 0.004 – 1.2 parts of shelling resin dispersion per 100 parts of core particles dispersion per minute, encompassing the range stated in Claim 11.
As discussed above, while Sugawara does not teach a preferred exposure ratio of the release agent at the surface of the toner particle, such a toner would necessarily possess a very low value for such a measure, reading on the inequality stated in Claim 12.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Grant S Seiler whose telephone number is (571)272-3015. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 5:30 Pacific.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GRANT STEVEN SEILER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/PETER L VAJDA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 07/31/2026
Prosecution Insights