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 Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed 11/21/2025 has been entered and is being considered. Claim 1 is amended and claims 10-15 are added. No new matter appears to have been added by these amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and arguments based thereon are considered to have placed the scope of the claims outside the art proffered to make the rejections over 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 in the prior office action. As such, these rejections are withdrawn.
After further search and consideration, the Examiner raises a new grounds of rejection. The new grounds of rejection were required by applicant’s amendment.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, and 9-15 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyooka et al (WO 2020175422 A1, published 03/09/2020, US 20220082940 A1 used in lieu of translation).
Regarding Claim 1-3, 5, 10, 11, and 15, Toyooka discloses a photosensitive resin structure for a printing plate and method for producing such, wherein the plate comprises a support , a photosensitive resin composition layer, an infrared ablation layer, and a cover film sequentially stacked (Abstract).
Toyooka does not disclose the limitations of the claim in a single particular experimental embodiment. Rather, these limitations are met by the general disclosure of the reference.
The support is discussed from [0058]-[0063], where the support may be but is not limited to a polyester film such as PET or polybutylene terephthalate.
The photosensitive resin composition layer is described from [064]-[0164], wherein the layer comprises a thermoplastic elastomer is a copolymer comprising a monovinyl-substituted aromatic hydrocarbon and a conjugated diene, and a hydrophilic copolymer, photopolymerizable monomer(s), and photopolymerization initiators are also comprised.
Conjugated dienes listed as preferred monomers include those at [0071], such as 1,3-hexadiene, isoprene, chloroprene, butadiene, 4,5,-diethyl-1,3-octadiene, 2,3-methyl-1,3-pentadiene, and 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene
Aryl monomers discussed as preferred monomers include those at [0078], such as but not limited to styrene, t-butyl styrene, divinylbenzene, 1,1-diphenylstyrene, N,N-dimethyl-p-aminoethyl styrene, vinyl pyridine, p-methoxystyrene, alpha-methylstyrene, and 1,1-diphentlyethylene.
The Infrared Ablation layer is discussed from [0165]-[0252], where the layer comprises an infrared absorber, a dispersant, a binder polymer, additives, and a coating solvent used to form the film.
The infrared absorber is discussed from [0173]-[0188], such as carbon black or a metal compound such as chromium oxide or colorant such as a cyanine dye. Carbon black is a preferred absorber, present between 10-90% by mass of the infrared ablation layer. The size of carbon black present in the layer ranges from 20 nm to 80 nm in diameter (claim 3 – overlapping at 20nm). Carbon black used may preferably have a pH value between 9 and 2.5, more preferably between 3.5 and 8 (claim 5), wherein carbon black having a pH in this range helps facilitate peeling.
Dispersants discussed from [0190]-[0224], where dispersants are compounds having adsorbing moieties to interact with the surface functional group(s) of the infrared absorbing agent whilst also being compatible with the base resin binder polymer.
The binder polymer is discussed from [0225]-[0242], where the binder polymer is one or more of a resin described in [0226] such as a polyetherketone resin, melamine resin, styrene resin, polybutadiene resin, or other recited therein. The binder polymer may for example be a copolymer of a monovinyl-substituted aromatic hydrocarbon monomer and a conjugated diene monomer, or a hydrogenated product of said copolymer (claim 11 and 15). The binder polymer is present in the composition of the infrared ablation layer in 20 to 90% by mass relative to the amount of infrared absorber (claim 2 – overlapping at 90% mass, claim 10 – where the balance of infrared absorber to binder resin must be 100%, if the binder resin is present in 20-90% the absorber must be present in 10-80%).
Regarding Claim 6, the claim dictates a property parameter derived from the interactions of the resin of the infrared ray ablation layer and the carbon black filler.
Properties are emergent from structure – when a structure has been found or rendered obvious, the properties must be present. The infrared absorption layer of Toyooka bears a resin having subunits derived from monovalent aromatic hydrocarbons and conjugated dienes or a hydrogenated product thereof. The layer bears a carbon black embodiment that may be 20nm in diameter – the required structure of claim 1 has been rendered obvious by the prior art and as such the property parameter of the instant claim must be present (see MPEP 2112.01 I and II).
Regarding Claim 9, Toyooka discloses the limitations of the claims as discussed above regarding claim 1.
Toyooka does not disclose the limitations of the claim in a single particular experimental embodiment. Rather, these limitations are met by the general disclosure of the reference.
Toyooka discloses a manufacturing method for producing a flexographic printing plate from the precursor, wherein the raw plate precursor includes a support, a photosensitive resin composition layer, an infrared ablation layer disposed thereatop. The precursor is exposed to UV light from the side of the support, then the infrared ablation layer is irradiated to form a pattern by lithography, then irradiating the photosensitive resin composition layer with uv light for pattern exposure, then removing the infrared ablation layer and the unexposed portions of the resin composition layer. A post-exposure treatment may be performed as needed.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to arrive at the claimed invention from the general disclosure of the reference to arrive at a printing plate, applying known techniques (the light exposures) to known materials (the layers and compositions thereof of the raw plate) to arrive at a predictable result.
Regarding Claim 12-14, Toyooka discloses the limitations of the claim as discussed above regarding claim 1.
Toyooka does not explicitly state the chemical makeup of the copolymer of a conjugated diene and monovinyl substituted aromatic compound in the context of the ablation layer.
However, Toyooka does state potential chemical components for the use of the same genus of copolymers in relation to the photosensitive layer as discussed above regarding claim 1. Toyooka further states that using the copolymer of a conjugated diene and monovinyl substituted aromatic compound in the context of the ablation layer improves scratch resistance at [0230].
Conjugated dienes listed as preferred monomers include those at [0071], such as 1,3-hexadiene, isoprene, chloroprene, butadiene, 4,5,-diethyl-1,3-octadiene, 2,3-methyl-1,3-pentadiene, and 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene (claim 13). While butadiene is not specifically mentioned therein with a 1,3 or 1,2 double bond stereochemistry, the genus of compounds called “butadiene” is exactly 2 - a person having ordinary skill in the art would immediately envision each of the species in such a small genus (claim 14).
Aryl monomers discussed as preferred monomers include those at [0078], such as but not limited to styrene, t-butyl styrene, divinylbenzene, 1,1-diphenylstyrene, N,N-dimethyl-p-aminoethyl styrene, vinyl pyridine, p-methoxystyrene, alpha-methylstyrene, and 1,1-diphentlyethylene. (Claim 12).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to arrive at the claimed invention from the general disclosure of the reference and the suggested monomers to be used in a copolymer comprising copolymer of a conjugated diene and monovinyl substituted aromatic compound, taking the explicit teachings of the reference as applied to one instance of the copolymer (the photosensitive layer) and applying them to another instance of the copolymer (the laser ablation layer) in order to improve the scratch resistance of the ablation layer.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyooka et al (WO 2020175422 A1, published 03/09/2020, US 20220082940 A1 used in lieu of translation).as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nakagawa (WO 2018056211 A1, published 03/29/2018, US 20210229480 used in lieu of translation)
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Toyooka discloses the limitations of the claim as described above regarding claim 1.
Toyooka however does not disclose a specific resin embodiment where the styrene content of the resins used in the infrared absorption layer is between 40%-80% or between 30%-70%. Toyooka does disclose that the resins in such layers may be a styrene-conjugated diene and/or hydrogenated version thereof, but rather does not teach a specific chemical embodiment laying out the precise amounts of styrene and comonomer.
This limitation is met by Nakagawa.
Nakagawa discloses an ablation layer for a photosensitive resin for a relief printing plate, wherein the layer contains at least an acid-modified polymer and an infrared-absorbing agents (abstract).
The ablation layer of Nakagawa comprises a photosensitive resin structure, wherein the layer contains at least an IR-absorbing agents and an acid-modified polymer ([0062]-[0114] and [0115]-[0125], wherein the IR-absorbing material may also have a non-infrared shielding effect – specific examples include carbon black for both effects of IR absorption and non-IR shielding. Additional components may include a polymer that is different from the acid-modified polymer, such as an elastomer composed of a copolymer of a mono-vinyl substituted aromatic hydrocarbon and a conjugated diene monomer, a hydrogenated product of said copolymer, or a modified product of said copolymer. The copolymer, as described from [0130]-[0137], may comprise the monovinyl aromatic hydrocarbon in an amount ranging from 10-90% by mass, more preferably 30-70% by mass -specific examples thereof include styrene-isoprene, styrene-butadiene, SIS, and SBS copolymers or hydrogenated products thereof.
The reference ascribes that tuning the proportion of styrene (monovinyl aromatic hydrocarbon) and the conjugated diene allows for increasing the flexibility or hardness of the layer – where increasing the portion of styrene increases the hardness. In the experimental examples, the reference discloses resin embodiments Tuftec H1043 – a hydrogenated SBS elastomer having 70 mass% styrene ([0272]), and Tuftec H1051 ([0277] as a hydrogenated SBS having styrene in 42 mass%.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to arrive at the claimed invention by incorporating the SBS/SIS and/or hydrogenated variants thereof taught by Nakagawa into the resin composition of Toyooka, or, in the alternative, selecting copolymers having specific styrene content as taught by Nakagawa so as to tune the mechanical properties of the resultant ablation layer and arrived at an optimized improved product.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyooka et al (WO 2020175422 A1, published 03/09/2020, US 20220082940 A1 used in lieu of translation). as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Melamed et al (US 20110236705 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Toyooka discloses he limitations of the claim as discussed above regarding claim 1.
However, Toyooka does not disclose a particular value of dibutyl phthalate adsorption associated with the carbon black particles discussed therein.
This limitation is met by Melamed.
Melamed discloses a flexographic printing plate precursor and a method of making such, wherein the photosensitive layer comprises an IR ablatable layer comprising a polymer formulation having EDPM rubbers and other resins such as copolymers of styrene and butadiene, SBS copolymers, styrene-isoprene-styrene copolymers, and other polybutadiene and/or polyisoprene elastomers.
As an infrared absorbing component, the layer comprises a component that absorbs in the range of 750-1400nm wavelengths, where preferred components include carbon black or pigments such as merocyanine or pyrilium. Carbon blacks, particularly conductive embodiments thereof, are considered preferred, where these materials have a dibutyl phthalate adsorption value of 110 mL/100g (1mL=1cm^3) or less (interpreted as 0-110 mL/100g). Lower values, such as those in the range described, are preferably used, as per the reference they provide lower viscosity in formulation and there improve the ease of production.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to arrive at the claimed invention prior to the filing date, using the teachings of lower dbp values’ relationship to viscosity as provided by Melamed to select carbon black embodiments as per Toyooka having dbp values sufficient to tune the viscosity of the infrared laser ablative layer for easier manufacturing.
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 ANDREW PRESTON TRAYWICK whose telephone number is (571)272-2982. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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, Mark Huff can be reached at 571-272-1385. 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.
/A.P.T./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734