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. 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. Claim s 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hama et al (US 2015/0030842) . With regards to claim 1 , Hama teaches a resin particle (abstract) that contains a polymer of a monomer mixture (abstract) that includes a crosslinking monomer (abstract) that includes multifunctional (meth)acrylates (0039) in an amount of 50 to 99% (abstract). Hama does not teach the maximum absorbance at either of the claimed wavelengths and the ratio thereof. Applicants have cited that the ratio of the maximum absorbance at the claimed wavelength would be satisfied so long as the amount of multifunctional monomer used to form the particle is over 50% by weight. Therefore, w hen the composition recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, the claimed properties or function are presumed inherent. MPEP 2112.01 . Because the prior art exemplifies Applicant’s claimed composition in that the claimed components in the claimed amounts, in particular the amount of multifunctional monomer used to form the particle, , the claimed physical properties relating to the absorbance ratio at the claimed wavelengths are inherently present in the prior art. Absent an objective showing to the contrary, the addition of the claimed physical properties to the claim language fails to provide patentable distinction over the prior art. With regards to claim 2 , Hama teaches the monomer used to make the particle to include a crosslinking monomer (abstract) which includes multifunctional (meth)acrylates (0039) . With regards to claim 3 , Hama teaches the monofunctional monomer to include a monofunctional (meth)acrylic acid ester (0036). With regards to claim 4 , Hama teaches the amount of the crosslinking multifunctional monomer to be 60% of the whole monomer mixture (0192 example 2). With regards to claim 5 , Hama teaches the resin particle to contain less than 30 ppm of unreacted monomer (0051) reading on 0.003 wt%. With regards to claim 6 , Hama teaches the resin particle to be dried (0078) and for the resin particle to be a powder (0183). 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. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegaya et al (US 5,766,324) in view of Hama et al (US 2015/0030842) . With regards to claim 7 , Ikegaya teaches an ink composition (title) that includes a polymer particle (column 3, lines 36-43), a UV curable resin (column 4, lines 59-65), and a photopolymerization initiator (column 7 example 2). Ikegaya does not teach the claimed fine resin particle to be used as the polymer particle. The disclosure of Hama is adequately set forth in paragraph 3 above and is herein incorporated by reference. Hama teaches the motivation for using the particle as taught in Hama in a resin composition (0001) to be because it has excellent light diffusion and oil absorbing properties (0013). Hama and Ikegaya are analogous in the art of curable compositions containing particles. In light of the benefit above, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to use the particle of Hama as the particle in the composition of Ikegaya, thereby obtaining the present invention. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JESSICA WHITELEY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5203 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Joseph Del Sole can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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 571-272-100 0. /JESSICA WHITELEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763