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
Claims 4 and 5 have been cancelled. Claim 6 has been amended to reflect only the limitation regarding the surface roughness of the charging member. Claim 1 has been amended to reflect, in addition to its original limitations, the limitations of cancelled Claims 4 and 5, and the limitations previously reflected in Claim 6. Claim 1 also now reflects a limitation regarding the composition of the electroconductive layer of the charging member. Claim 7 has been amended similarly to Claim 1.
The amendment to correct the structure of compound (D-6) in Specification paragraph [0073] is acknowledged. No new subject matter has been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2025-10-24 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the calculation of the value of the ratio η/q (where η represents the elastic deformation rate of the surface layer of the photosensitive member, and q represents a proportion of the hydrotalcite particle to the toner, both quoted as %) presented in the prior office action gives a different range of values than that recited in amended Claim 1. Specifically, Applicant points out that Amano teaches a content of hydrotalcite particles with respect to the mass of toner particles, whereas the present invention takes the content of hydrotalcite particles with respect to the mass of the whole toner, including other external additives.
Applicant helpfully provides a table of values for q converted from Amano’s preparative examples to the proper basis. Based on these converted values, Applicant argues that Amano’s examples do not contain a value for q that would result (taken with the rough value of η taught by Nakamura) in a ratio of η/q reading on the recited range in amended Claim 1. However, Amano’s teaching is not a list of discrete values for the content of hydrotalcite particles, but a range. Examples taken from Applicant’s table of converted values for q show that the range taught by Amano gives a content of hydrotalcite particles with respect to the mass of the whole toner of roughly 0.04 – 0.98%. As detailed in the rejection below, this range for q, alongside Nakamura’s range of η, results in a range of η/q encompassing that recited in amended Claim 1.
Since the range of η/q resulting from the combination of Nakamura’s range for η and Amano’s converted range for q encompasses the claimed range, Amano’s examples do not need to contain an embodiment having a converted value for q that would result a specific value of η/q lying in that range to read upon it. Similarly, the ratio η/q does not need to be taught as a result-effective parameter by the prior art, as alleged by Applicant, since the taught continuous range encompasses the claimed range, and optimization for a particular result would not be required to arrive at that range.
For these reasons, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive, and the updated rejection below is maintained.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 3, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al (US PGP 2019/0265602) in view of Amano et al (US PGP 2020/0292956), further in view of Watanabe et al (US PGP 2013/0272747), further in view of Yamada et al (US PGP 2015/0331343).
Nakamura teaches an image forming apparatus and a process cartridge ([0001]). The process cartridge is detachably attachable to the body of the image forming apparatus, and includes at least an electrophotographic photosensitive member and a developing unit ([0125]). The developing unit in turn stores a toner which is used to form a toner image on the photosensitive member ([0128]).
Nakamura teaches that the photosensitive member includes a protective layer as the outermost layer, which may be formed by polymerizing monomers described by a general formula (1) or a general formula (2), and a triphenylamine moiety bearing a (meth)acryloxy group ([0115]). General formulae (1) and (2) may represent monomers having both urethane and (meth)acrylate functional groups ([0043]). Examples of specific monomers which may be represented by formulae (1) or (2) are given ([0047], pages 6 and 7), where Nakamura’s monomer (L-2) is the same as monomer (B-1) of the instant application (Specification, [0071], page 17). Examples of specific triphenylamine-based monomers having (meth)acryloxy groups are given ([0048], page 7), where Nakamura’s monomer (OCL-2) is the same as monomer (D-8) of the instant application (Specification, [0073], page 25).
Nakamura describes a method of forming the protective layer of the photosensitive member ([0138]), which is substantially the same as the method described in the instant application (Specification, [0157]). Further, Nakamura discloses photosensitive member Example 14 (page 14, Table 1), which uses as monomers equal parts by mass of (L-2) and (OCL-2). Example photosensitive member 18 of the instant application also includes equal parts by mass of monomers (B-1) and (D-8) (those being the same as Nakamura’s (L-2) and (OCL-2), respectively), and has a reported value for the elastic deformation rate of 51% (Specification, Table 1, page 54). Therefore, the photosensitive member of Nakamura would also have a protective surface layer which inherently possesses a value for the elastic deformation rate of about 51%.
Nakamura does not appear to describe a specific toner for use with the image forming apparatus.
Amano teaches a toner comprising a toner particle and an external additive, wherein the external additive includes silica particles and hydrotalcite particles (Abstract). Amano gives a general structural formula for hydrotalcite particles ([0061]), and gives F- as an optional anion which may be included in that structural formula ([0064]). Amano teaches that the toner having the external additives as described prevents the occurrence of development streaks ([0039]).
Amano teaches that the content of hydrotalcite particles is preferably in the range of 0.05 – 1.00 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts of toner particles ([0058]). In addition, Amano exemplifies toners having hydrotalcite particles added in amounts of 0.06, 0.10, 0.22, 0.35, 0.50, and 1.00 parts by mass relative to 100 parts of toner particles (Table 4, page 13). When the content of hydrotalcite particles is taken relative to the mass of the whole toner, as opposed to the toner particles, the range taught by Amano is roughly 0.04 – 0.98 parts by mass relative to 100 parts of toner (see discussion in the response to arguments above).
As discussed above, Nakamura’s photosensitive member Example 14 would inherently possess a value for elastic deformation rate of 51%. In addition, as shown in in the instant application (Table 1, page 53), all but 5 of the 31 example photosensitive members possess a value of elastic deformation rate in the range of 45 – 55%. These include photosensitive members wherein the monomer having both urethane and (meth)acrylate functional groups and the triphenylamine having a (meth)acrylate group are used in equal parts by mass, and where one or the other is favored.
Therefore, where the protective layer of the photosensitive member taught by Nakamura has a value for elastic deformation rate of roughly 50% (labeled η), and Amano teaches a hydrotalcite particles content of 0.04 – .98% by mass (labeled q), the value of η/q for the image forming apparatus of Nakamura using the toner of Amano would lie in the range 51 – 1,250, encompassing that stated in Claim 1.
η
q
=
50
%
0.98
%
=
51
η
q
=
50
%
0.04
%
=
1,250
Nakamura describes a charging roller as an optional embodiment of the charging unit of the process cartridge ([0128], but does not appear to give further details of its structure, preparation, or surface roughness.
Watanabe teaches a charging roller as part of an electrophotographic apparatus ([0026]). The charging roller is in contact with and charges a photosensitive member. The charging roller of Watanabe comprises an electroconductive support, and an elastic layer ([0038]). The elastic layer may also be electrically conductive, which is analogous to having an electroconductive layer disposed on the support. The base polymer of the elastic layer may be a thermosetting rubber ([0048]), and examples of thermosetting rubbers are given ([0049]). Watanabe teaches that the surface of the elastic layer preferably has a ten-point average roughness (Rz) of 3 – 30 µm, which suppresses image non-uniformity ([0056]). Watanabe discloses details of controlling the roughness of the surface layer of the charging roller ([0052] – [0058]). Watanabe does not appear to teach incorporation of polyurethane resin particles into the conductive layer.
Yamada teaches an electrophotographic member and a process cartridge (Abstract). The process cartridge is detachably attached to the body of an image forming apparatus ([0018]), and comprises a charging member ([0019]). Yamada teaches that the charging member may be a charging roller, and that when roughness is needed in the surface of the roller, that fine particles may be added to the surface layer of the charging roller ([0093]). Specifically pointed out as fine particles which may be used are polyurethane resin particles ([0093]).
In implementing the image forming apparatus including the process cartridge of Nakamura, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the toner of Amano in the process cartridge to help eliminate development streaks. In addition, in preparing the process cartridge of Nakamura to be used with the toner of Amano, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to control the surface roughness of the charging roller as taught by Watanabe, thereby suppressing image non-uniformity. In seeking to roughen the surface layer of the charging roller as taught by Watanabe, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate polyurethane resin particles as taught by Yamada.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the toner of Amano in the image forming apparatus of Nakamura, wherein the charging roller has a roughened surface as taught by Watanabe, and wherein that surface roughness is achieved by adding the polyurethane resin particles as taught by Yamada, satisfying Claim 1.
As discussed above, Nakamura’s photosensitive member Example 14 would inherently possess a value for elastic deformation rate of 51%, satisfying the range stated in Claim 2.
Amano gives Mg2+ as a preferable divalent metal cation, and Al3+ as a preferable trivalent metal cation, to be included in the hydrotalcite particles ([0063]), satisfying Claim 3.
Watanabe teaches that the surface of the elastic layer preferably has a ten-point average roughness (Rz) of 3 – 30 µm, which suppresses image non-uniformity ([0056]), encompassing the range stated in Claim 6.
As stated above, Nakamura teaches an image forming apparatus (the same as an electrophotographic apparatus) including the process cartridge and toner as described above, satisfying Claim 7.
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 12/15/2025