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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 5, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 states that the UV absorber includes “benzophenon” wherein it is believed applicant meant benzophenone. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al (JP 2018156068).
With regards to claim 1, Lee teaches a photosensitive resin composition (title) that contains a binder (0043), a photopolymeric compound (0008) that includes acrylate monomers (0063), a photopolymerization initiator (0065), a solvent (0082) and a UV absorber (0086). Lee teaches the binder to have the following repeating units:
PNG
media_image1.png
120
72
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(0114) reading on claimed formula I and the first repeating unit,
PNG
media_image2.png
67
96
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(0114) reading on claimed formula 2 and the second repeating unit,
PNG
media_image3.png
84
102
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(0114) reading on claimed formula 4 which reads on the claimed third, fourth, and fifth repeating units, and
PNG
media_image4.png
117
80
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(0114) reading on claimed formula 5 which reads on the claimed third, fourth, and fifth repeating units. It is important to note that the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1 does not require the repeating units to be different from one another. Therefore, because the claimed formula 5 reads on the third, fourth, and fifth repeating units it would read on all three being present.
With regards to claim 2, Lee teaches the ultraviolet absorber to include benzotriazole compounds (0091).
With regards to claim 3, Lee teaches the amount of additives to be 0.13% (01119 examples 1-5).
With regards to claim 4, Lee teaches the composition to contain scattering particles (0003).
With regards to claim 6, Lee teaches the amount of the claimed first repeating unit to be 30% and the amount of the claimed third repeating unit to be 10% (0114) reading on a ratio of 3:1.
With regards to claim 7, It is important to note that the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1 does not require the repeating units to be different from one another. Therefore, because the claimed formula 5 reads on the third, fourth, and fifth repeating units it would read on all three being present.
With regards to claim 8, Lee teaches the amount of the claimed first repeating unit to be 30% and the amount of the claimed second repeating unit to be 20% (0114). It is important to note that the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1 does not require the repeating units to be different from one another. Therefore, because the claimed formula 5 reads on the third, fourth, and fifth repeating units it would read on all three being present.
With regards to claim 9, Lee teaches the composition to include polyethylene glycol monomethyl ether (0090).
With regards to claim 10, Lee teaches the photoinitiator to include acetophenone, acetophenone, thioxanthone, or benzophenone compounds (0065).
With regards to claim 11, Lee teaches the amount of photoinitiator to be 0.01 to 5% by weight (0074).
With regards to claim 12, Lee teaches the solvent to include ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (0083).
With regards to claim 13, Lee teaches the composition to contain 21.64 parts with the remainder being solvent (0119) reading on 78.36 parts solvent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (JP 2018156068).
The disclosure of Lee is adequately set forth in paragraph 5 above and is herein incorporated by reference.
With regards to claim 5, Lee is silent on the particle size of the particles in the composition.
However, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 124 (CCPA 1955). In this case, one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention would know to alter the size of the particle in order to achieve the desired opacity of the composition.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following reference teaches the claimed composition but the binder resin does not contain the claimed third, fourth, or fifth repeating units: Nozawa et al (US 2009/0054543); and the following reference teaches the claimed binder resin and composition: Cho et al (KR 1020190111637).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA WHITELEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5203. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 5:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 5712721130. 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.
/JESSICA WHITELEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763