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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election of Group I, claims 1-3, in the reply filed on 03/13/2026 is acknowledged. Because Applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 4-6 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/13/2026.
Claim Interpretation
For the purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the phrase “warm water” used throughout the claims to refer to water that has a temperature of 50 °C.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayashi et al. (US-20200002561-A1) (hereinafter referred to as “Hayashi”).
Regarding claims 1-3, Hayashi teaches an aqueous pigment ink for textile inkjet printing (see Hayashi at para. 0014, teaching an inkjet textile printing ink containing water; also see example Ink 5 of Hayashi at Table 2 at pg. 8, teaching an aqueous ink) comprising:
• a pigment, a water-dispersible resin, water, and a water-soluble organic solvent (see Hayashi at para. 0014, teaching the ink as containing a pigment, a water-dispersible resin, a water-soluble organic solvent, and water; also see example Ink 5 of Hayashi at Table 2 at pg. 8, teaching an example ink containing a pigment (BONJET BLACK CW-2), a water-dispersible resin (SUPERFLEX 460), a water-soluble organic solvent (glycerol), and water); wherein
• an ink film made by drying the aqueous pigment ink for textile inkjet printing has a weight change ratio of 20% or less between before and after immersion in warm water at 50 °C, and has a film elongation of 50% to 300% after immersion in warm water at 50 °C (a weight change ratio of 10% or less, regarding claim 2) (a film elongation of 100% to 200%, regarding claim 3) (the claimed limitation is notably a property of the ink; example Ink 5 of Hayashi is the same ink as that claimed by Applicants; first, example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains the same pigment in the same concentration as that disclosed by Applicants (see Applicant’s specification at para. 0019, teaching BONJET BLACK CW-2 as a suitable pigment, which is the same as that used in example Ink 5 of Hayashi; also see Applicant’s specification at para. 0016, teaching the pigment concentration may range from 0.1 to 15% by mass; example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains 1.995% of pigment (13.3% total content of pigment dispersion in ink • 0.15 solid fraction of pigment in dispersion = 1.995% total pigment content in ink), which falls within the range taught by Applicants at para. 0016 of their specification); second, example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains the same water-dispersible resin in the same concentration as that disclosed by Applicants (see Applicant’s specification at para. 0043, teaching SUPERFLEX 460 as a suitable water-dispersible resin, which is the same as that used in example Ink 5 of Hayashi; also see Applicant’s specification at para. 0044, teaching the water-dispersible resin concentration may range from 1 to 25% by mass; example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains 8.018% of water-dispersible resin (21.1% total content of resin dispersion in ink • 0.38 solid fraction of resin in dispersion = 8.018% total resin content in ink), which falls within the range taught by Applicants at para. 0044 of their specification); third, example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains the same surfactant in the same concentration as that disclosed by Applicants (see para. 0105 of Applicant’s specification, showing the use of 0.5% of OLFINE E1010 in the examples, which is the same surfactant and concentration as that used in example Ink 5 of Hayashi); fourth, example ink 5 of Hayashi contains the same water-soluble organic solvent in the same concentration as that disclosed by Applicants (see Applicant’s specification at para. 0052 and 0054, teaching the solvent may include glycerol and may be present in an amount of 5 to 50% by mass; example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains glycerol as a solvent in an amount of 10% by mass, which falls within this range); and lastly, example ink 5 of Hayashi contains water in the same concentration as that disclosed by Applicants (see Applicant’s specification at para. 0051, teaching the content of water to range from 25 to 80% by mass; example Ink 5 of Hayashi contains 55.1% of water, which falls within this range); consequently, example Ink 5 of Hayashi meets all the disclosed embodiments as that claimed by Applicants; accordingly, since the ink of Hayashi is the same as that claimed, it necessarily meets the claimed weight change ratio and film elongation properties; products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. See MPEP § 2112.01(II); the burden of proof then shifts to the Applicants to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01); in other words, the burden of proof is shifted to Applicants to show the ink of Hayashi as not meeting the weight change ratio and elongation properties as claimed).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hirata et al. (US-20250101241-A1) teach an active energy ray curable composition (see Hirata at Title).
Ogawa et al. (US-20100091052-A1) teach an ink for inkjet printing (see Ogawa at Title).
Asami et al. (US-20190284416-A1) teach a curable composition (see Asami at Title).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey E Barzach whose telephone number is (571)272-8735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday; 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Amber R Orlando can be reached on 571-270-3149. 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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1731
/AMBER R ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights