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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, species with activation by light, claims 1-6, in the reply filed on 4/28/26 is acknowledged. Claims 7-18 have been withdrawn. Claims 1-6 remain in the application for prosecution thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1-6, the term “the printable dielectric ink composition” lacks antecedent basis as the first occurrence should be preceded by an “a” not a “the”. In addition, the adding a crosslinker to the catalyst-polymer complex is unclear and confusing as should this be the “inhibited catalyst-polymer complex” as an inhibitor was added to the catalyst-polymer complex to form an inhibited catalyst polymer complex? Could these steps be reversed and if so then this needs to be recited as such – see claim 2. Clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) in combination with Poelma (2023/0129561) or Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171).
Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) teaches a polymerizable composition including a metathesis polymerization catalyst and a monomer (claimed catalyst polymer complex), coating and polymerizing by crosslinking the cross linkable resin composite (abstract and (col. 2, line 42 – col. 3, line 20). Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) teaches the cyclcoolefin monomers and metathesis polymerization catalyst (col. 3, lines 42 – col. 8, line 24). Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) teaches the crosslinking agent (col. 13, line 28 – col. 14, line 55). Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) also teaches including radical crosslinking retarders (col. 14, lines 57-62) which meet the claimed inhibitor. Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) teaches activating the crosslinking using heat (col. 16, lines 65-67).
Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) fails to teach the radical crosslinking retarder to form an inhibited catalyst polymer complex.
Poelma (2023/0129561) teaches making three-dimensional object using a polymerizable liquid by forming an inhibited ring opening metathesis polymerization catalyst (ROHM)(abstract) and using heat or a light source [0007],[0030] for polymerization.
Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) teaches ring opening metathesis polymerization catalyst (ROHM) and using heat or a light source [0151] for polymerization. Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) teaches including a ring opening metathesis polymerization inhibitor for preventing polymerization [0205]-[0206] and [0350]-[0353].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) ROMP polymerizable composition to include forming an inhibitor catalyst polymer as evidenced by either with Poelma (2023/0129561) or Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) with the expectation of controlling the polymerization until exposure to the radiation/light activation
Regarding claim 2, Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) teaches adding the additive (including the retarder or inhibitor) to the monomer solution or to the catalyst solution (col. 15, lines 1-3 and col. 16, lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 3, Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) teaches radiation at wavelengths of 200nm – 400nm in the UV range [0151] while Poelma (2023/0129561) also teaches using ultraviolet light which has a known wavelength of 200nm-400nm [0046].
Regarding claim 4, Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) teaches using a photo initiator (claimed photosensitizer) [0053]-[0060] and [0437]-[0457] while Poelma (2023/0129561) also teaches a photo initiator (claimed photosensitizer)
Regarding claims 5, Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) teaches dispersing the layer on a substrate and then exposing to radiation [0151].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) in combination with Poelma (2023/0129561) or Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) further in combination with Leguizamon et al. (2022/0363784).
Features detailed above concerning the teachings of Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) in combination with Poelma (2023/0129561) or Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) are incorporated here.
Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) in combination with Poelma (2023/0129561) or Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) fails to teach the light source to be a light emitting diode (LED).
Leguizamon et al. (2022/0363784) teaches metathesis polymerization for photopolymerization whereby the UV light emitting diode is utilized [0017].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yoshiwara et al. (7,964,685) in combination with Poelma (2023/0129561) or Vidavsky et al. (2017/0306171) polymerization process to utilize a LED to supply the UV light as evidenced by Leguizamon et al. (2022/0363784) with the expectation of achieving similar success, i.e. polymerization with a light source.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN K TALBOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7-4PM.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/BRIAN K TALBOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights