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 .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending. Claims 1, 17 and 19 are currently amended.
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.
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) 1-14 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuda. (JP 2013-57902 A; see English Machine Translation) in view of Shibuya et al. (US 2004/0043325 A1).
Regarding claims 1-14 and 17-18, Matsuda discloses (see abstract, claims and examples) a photosensitive resin multilayer body ( photosensitive resin laminate) comprising a support film (substrate) and a photosensitive resin composition layer (photosensitive resin layer) comprises an alkali-soluble polymer [0019-0020], a compound having an ethylenically unsaturated double bond [0028], a photopolymerization initiator containing a hexaarylbiimidazole [0038] and a peroxide [0026]. The photosensitive resin composition layer further comprises a colorant (Leuco Crystal Violet and/or Diamond Green; [0062-6004]) in an amount of 0.01 parts by weight to 1 part by weight of dye (0.1 to 10% by mass; [0064]). The photosensitive resin composition layer further comprises a radical polymerization inhibitor [0066-0067]. Matsuda also teaches a method for producing a photosensitive resin multilayer body comprising the step of preparing a coating solution and a step of applying the coating solution on the support film (substrate) and drying the coating solution to form the photosensitive resin composition layer ( see examples and claims and [0081-0083]).
Further regards to the instant claims, Matsuda does not explicitly disclose a peroxide containing acetone peroxide and/or methyl ethyl ketone peroxide, and the content of the peroxide is 0.01 ppm or more and 1,000 ppm or less, based on the photosensitive resin layer as instantly claimed. However, Matsuda recognizes that peroxide is contained in the photosensitive resin composition layer [0026]. Nonetheless, the examiner has added Shibuya et al. to teach it is well-known to one of ordinary skilled in the art to include acetone and/ or methyl ethyl ketone peroxide in a photosensitive resin composition layer [0131] in view of generating a radical by the energy of light, heat or both of them and initiate and accelerate the progress the polymerization reaction [0107-0110]. Shibuya et al. also teaches the peroxide can be used in combination of two or more thereof generators ( photoinitiators) such as hexaaryl biimidazole) [0131, 0137 and 0167] and may be added in a content amount from 0.1 to 50% by weight [0166] encompassing the instant claimed range of 0.01 ppm or more and 1,000 ppm or less. Furthermore, it is noted that the content amount of peroxide is optimizable. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify Shibuya et al. to include an content amount of the peroxide in the photosensitive resin composition layer is 0.01 ppm or more and 1,000 ppm or less, based on the photosensitive resin composition layer as instantly claimed in claim 1 or 0.1 ppm or more as recited by claim 2, 1 ppm or more as recited by claim 3, 10 ppm or more as recited by claim 4, 200 ppm or less as recited by claim 5, is less than 100 ppm as recited by claim 6, 10 ppm or less as recited by claim 7, 5 ppm or less as recited by claim 8 and 1 ppm or less as recited by instant claim 9 in view of routine optimization and in view of accelerating progress the polymerization reaction Matsuda and Shibuya et al. are analogous art in the photosensitive resin field. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the peroxide of Matsuda to include an acetone peroxide and/or methyl ethyl ketone peroxide as taught by Shibuya et al. in view of further accelerating progress the polymerization reaction [0109].
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
No prior art teaches photosensitive resin multilayer body comprising a support film and a photosensitive resin composition layer formed on the support film, wherein the photosensitive resin composition layer comprises a polymer, a photopolymerization initiator containing a hexaarylbiimidazole compound, a colorant, an oxide and/or decomposition product of the colorant and a radical polymerization inhibitor as instantly claimed.
Claims 15 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicants are 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 CHANCEITY N ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:00 am-6:00 pm; IFP; PHP).
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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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.
/CHANCEITY N ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
