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 with respect to claims 1, 2 and 4-15 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuda (US PG Pub. 2020/0087527) in view of Hakiri (US PG Pub. 2015/0376425).
Regarding claim 1: Okuda teaches an ink set, comprising: a non-white ink [0021], which comprises water [0116], a coloring material [0104], an organic solvent [0119], and an acetylene glycol compound [0119], [0120], [0083]; and a white ink [0021], which comprises water [0087], a coloring material [0023], an organic solvent [0078], and a compound represented by General formula (1) below [0084]:
PNG
media_image1.png
169
575
media_image1.png
Greyscale
---General formula (1) where R represents a hydrogen atom or a methyl group, n1 and n2 represent integers of from 1 through 7, k represents an integer of from 0 through 5, and m represents an integer of from 1 through 20. Okuda does not disclose a non-white ink comprising bis(2-ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate. Hakiri teaches a non-white ink that comprises water [00e0], a coloring material [0087] – [0103], an organic solvent [0073], bis(2-3ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate (dioctyl sulfosuccinate) [0106], and an acetylene glycol compound [0105], [0112]. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ink set taught by Okuda with the ink including bis(2-ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate as taught by Hakiri in order to improve dispersion stability and reduce the likelihood of a clogged nozzle.
Regarding claim 2: Okuda teaches the acetylene glycol compound comprises an acetylene glycol compound represented by General formula (2) below [0119], [0120], [0083]:
PNG
media_image2.png
81
556
media_image2.png
Greyscale
---General formula (2) where x and y represent integers of 0 or greater and x+y is an integer of from 0 through 3.
Regarding claim 4: Okuda teaches the compound represented by General formula (1) comprises a compound represented by General formula (1-1) below [0084]:
PNG
media_image3.png
167
584
media_image3.png
Greyscale
---General formula (1-1) where k represents an integer of from 0 through 5 and m represents an integer of from I through 20.
Regarding claim 6: Okuda teaches applying the non-white ink to a print medium; and applying the white ink [0006].
Regarding claim 9: Okuda teaches reforming a surface of the print medium [0177].
Regarding claim 10: Okuda teaches applying processing fluid to the print medium [0127], the processing liquid comprising a polyvalent metal salt [0130].
Regarding claim 11: Okuda teaches the print medium is a non-absorbable soft packaging film [0089], [0169].
Regarding claim 12: Okuda teaches a printing apparatus, comprising: the ink set according to claim 1, comprising the non-white ink and the white ink [0021]; a print medium, which is a non-absorbable soft packaging film [0089], [0169]; a non-white ink applying unit configured to apply the non-white ink [0021]; and a white ink applying unit configured to apply the white ink [0021].
Regarding claim 13: Okuda teaches a printing set, comprising: a non-white ink [0021], which comprises water [0116], a coloring material [0104], an organic solvent [0119], and an acetylene glycol compound [0119], [0120], [0083]; a white ink [0021], which comprises water [0087], a coloring material [0023], an organic solvent [0078], and a compound represented by General formula (1) below [0084]; and a processing fluid [0127], which comprises water [0149] and a polyvalent metal salt [0130],
PNG
media_image4.png
165
563
media_image4.png
Greyscale
---General formula (1) where R represents a hydrogen atom or a methyl group, n1 and n2 represent integers of from 1 through 7, k represents an integer of from 0 through 5, and m represents an integer of from 1 through 20. Okuda does not disclose a non-white ink comprising bis(2-ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate. Hakiri teaches a non-white ink that comprises water [00e0], a coloring material [0087] – [0103], an organic solvent [0073], bis(2-3ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate (dioctyl sulfosuccinate) [0106], and an acetylene glycol compound [0105], [0112]. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ink set taught by Okuda with the ink including bis(2-ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate as taught by Hakiri in order to improve dispersion stability and reduce the likelihood of a clogged nozzle.
Regarding claim 14: Okuda teaches a non-white ink [0021] comprising: water [0116]; a coloring material [0104]; an organic solvent [0119]; and an acetylene glycol compound [0119], [0120], [0083], wherein the non-white ink is suitable for printing with the printing apparatus of claim 12 [0021]. Okuda does not disclose a non-white ink comprising bis(2-ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate. Hakiri teaches a non-white ink that comprises water [00e0], a coloring material [0087] – [0103], an organic solvent [0073], bis(2-3ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate (dioctyl sulfosuccinate) [0106], and an acetylene glycol compound [0105], [0112]. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ink set taught by Okuda with the ink including bis(2-ethylhexyl)sodium sulfosuccinate as taught by Hakiri in order to improve dispersion stability and reduce the likelihood of a clogged nozzle.
Regarding claim 15: Okuda teaches a white ink [0021], comprising: water [0087]; a coloring material [0023]; an organic solvent [0078]; and a compound represented by General formula (1) below [0084]:
PNG
media_image5.png
169
575
media_image5.png
Greyscale
---General formula (1) where R represents a hydrogen atom or a methyl group, ni and n2 represent integers of from 1 through 7, k represents an integer of from 0 through 5, and m represents an integer of from 1 through 20, wherein the white ink is suitable for printing with the printing apparatus according to claim 12 [0021].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Okuda (US PG Pub. 2020/0087527) in view of Hakiri (US PG Pub. 2015/0376425), and further in view of Matsuyama (US PG Pub. 2019/0249020).
Regarding claim 5, Okuda teaches the ink set according to claim 1 (see above), specifically a white ink. Okuda does not teach the ink having a static surface tension of the white ink is 30 mN/m or lower, and a dynamic surface tension of the white ink at a surface lifetime of 15 msec according to a maximum bubble pressure method is 34 mN/m or lower. Matsuyama teaches an ink [0053] that comprises water [0054], a coloring material [0054], an organic solvent [0054], and a surfactant [0056], [0151]. Matsuyama also teaches an ink having a static surface tension of an ink is 30 mN/m or lower, and a dynamic surface tension of the white ink at a surface lifetime of 15 msec according to a maximum bubble pressure method is 34 mN/m or lower [0179]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the white ink taught by Okuda with an ink having static and dynamic surface tension properties as taught by Matsuyama in order to improve discharge stability and improve ink stability.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Okuda (US PG Pub. 2020/0087527) in view of Hakiri (US PG Pub. 2015/0376425), and further in view of Matsuzuki (US PG Pub. 2019/0283464).
Regarding claim 7, Okuda teaches the ink set according to claim 6 (see above). Okuda does not teach applying the non-white ink is followed by applying the white ink. Matsuzuki teaches applying the non-white ink is followed by applying the white ink [0125]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the white ink taught by Okuda with the application order taught by Matsuzuki in order to provide excellent discharge stability.
Regarding claim 8, Okuda teaches the ink set according to claim 6 (see above). Okuda teaches a post-application drying device [0154]; however, there is no specific teaching as to when the drying occurs. Matsuzuki teaches no drying between applying the non-white ink and the white ink [0174] (the drying heater dries the medium to which the white ink composition and non-white ink composition adhere). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the white ink taught by Okuda with the application order taught by Matsuzuki in order to provide excellent image sharpness and quality.
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 Laura Martin whose telephone number is (571)272-2160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am - 3:30 pm.
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, Patricia Bianco can be reached at 571-272-4940. 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.
/LAURA MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2855