DETAILED ACTION
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, 2, 10, 12, 14, 17, 21, 22, 24, 25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feldman et al. (5,283,152) in view of Saccocio et al. (4,675,269) and Lee et al. (2017/0259976).
Regarding claim 1, Feldman teaches a media element for use with a media processing device, the media element comprising:
an environmental indicator (fig. 1, item 18) material configured, in response to exposure to a predetermined environmental condition (col. 5, lines 58-60, pressure), to change from an initial state to a second state producing an observable effect (see fig. 1),
a plurality of microcapsules (fig. 1, items 16), each microcapsule encapsulating the environmental indicator material in a non-activated configuration and releasing the environmental indicator material when ruptured (col. 5, lines 58-60, pressure), wherein the plurality of microcapsules prevent an occurrence of the observable effect while in the non-activated configuration, and allow the occurrence of the observable effect when the environmental indicator material is exposed to the predetermined environmental condition after at least a portion of the plurality of microcapsules are ruptured (see fig. 1 col. 5, lines 58-60, pressure); and
a bursting additive (fig. 1b, items 30) proximate the plurality of microcapsules (see fig. 1b, note that layer 22 is proximate layer 14), wherein the bursting additive selectively interacts with the plurality of microcapsule to rupture the plurality of microcapsules when a force is applied to the plurality of microcapsules and bursting additive (see fig. 1b, Note that particles 30 press on microcapsule layer 14 when pressure is applied to the medium and only in portions of the medium where pressure is applied. Note also that this mirrors the arrangement of the elected embodiment according to Figure 14B).
Saccocio teaches bursting microcapsules by free particle abrasion, which would require particles to be harder than the plurality of microcapsules (Saccocio, col. 2, lines 45-65). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make bursting additive particles of the type disclosed by Feldman harder than the microcapsules they are used to rupture, as disclosed by Saccocio, because doing so would amount to combining prior art teachings according to known methods to yield predictable results.
(Note that while Examiner maintains the teaching is inherent within Feldman, Saccocio has been incorporated because such inherency cannot be properly established).
Feldman in view of Saccocio does not teach wherein the predetermined environmental condition comprising a humidity level above a predetermined threshold. Lee teaches wherein a mechanical force and and humidity can both be used to burst microcapsules resulting in a color change (Lee, [0139], [0146]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use humidity, as disclosed by Lee, to burst the microcapsules disclosed by Feldman because doing so would amount to the simple substitution of one known microcapsule-bursting environmental condition for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claim 2, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the plurality of microcapsules are ruptured based on a force greater than a predetermined threshold, the force being at least one of a pressure force, a shear force, a frictional force, or a cutting force applied to the media element (Feldman, col. 5, lines 58-60, Note that there is necessarily a predetermined force at which the microcapsules are designed to rupture).
Regarding claim 10, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, wherein media element of claim 1, wherein the bursting additive increases an effective force applied to the microcapsules when the force is applied to the media element (Feldman, see fig. 1, Note that hard particles being pressed against the microcapsules apply more force than a softer medium or no medium at all).
Regarding claim 12, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, further comprising a printable substrate comprising the plurality of microcapsules and the bursting additive (Feldman, see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 12, wherein the plurality of microcapsules are positioned in a first layer of the printable substrate and the bursting additive is positioned in a second layer of the printable substrate, wherein the plurality of microcapsules are aligned with the bursting additive (Feldman, see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, wherein the bursting additive comprises an abrasive material comprising a plurality of particles (Feldman, col. 5, line 21).
Regarding claim 21, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, wherein the bursting additive reduces an amount of force required to be applied to the media element to rupture the plurality of microcapsules (Feldman, see fig. 1, Note that hard particles being pressed against the microcapsules apply more force than a softer medium or no medium at all).
Regarding claim 22, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 21, wherein at least a portion of the plurality of microcapsules are ruptured based on a pressure force being applied to the media element, and wherein the bursting additive reduces the amount of pressure force required to be applied to the media element in order to burst the microcapsules by anywhere between 5 to 90 percent (Feldman, see fig. 1, Note that hard particles being pressed against the microcapsules apply more force than a softer medium or no medium at all. Note that, depending on the force applied to the additive layer, the force required would fall).
Regarding claim 24, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, wherein the observable effect comprises at least one effect selected from the group consisting of a color state change, a change in transparency, a change in hue, a change in an electrical property, a change in conductivity, a change in capacitance, a movement of the environmental indicator material along a substrate, and combinations thereof (Feldman, see fig. 1, Note color change to internal phase 18 upon applied pressure).
Regarding claim 25, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 21, wherein the plurality of microcapsules prevent the observable effect by containing the environmental indicator material when the environmental indicator material changes state in response to the predetermined environmental condition occurring prior to the rupture of the microcapsules (Feldman, see fig. 1, item 18).
Regarding claim 27, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1, wherein the predetermined environmental condition comprises at least one condition selected from the group consisting of temperature excursion above a predetermined temperature threshold for at least a predetermined amount of time, temperature excursion below a predetermined temperature for at least a predetermined amount of time, cumulative exposure to temperature over a time period above a predetermined threshold for at least a predetermined amount of time, exposure to a particular chemical, oxygen exposure, ammonia exposure, exposure to a particular chemical above a threshold concentration, exposure to a particular chemical above the threshold concentration for at least a predetermined amount of time, exposure to at least a predetermined amount of radiation of a particular type, ultraviolet light exposure, humidity exposure, exposure to a humidity level above a predetermined threshold, and exposure to a humidity level above a predetermined threshold for at least a predetermined amount of time (Feldman, col. 3, lines 1-5).
Regarding claims 26 and 83, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 21, wherein the plurality of microcapsules prevent the observable effect by protecting the environmental indicator material from exposure to the predetermined environmental condition (Lee, [0146]).
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Carty et al. (2013/0123678).
Regarding claim 16, Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee teaches the media element of claim 1. Feldman in view of Saccocio and Lee does not teach wherein the bursting additive comprises a plurality of microneedles. Carty teaches this (Carty, [0152], see fig. 10, Note microcapsule layer 630 with microneedle additive 635). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use microneedles, as disclosed by Carty, as the additive disclosed by Feldman, because doing so would amount to the simple substitution of one known additive for another to obtain predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Saccocio and Lee.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, RICARDO MAGALLANES can be reached at 571-202-5960. 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights