CTNF 18/418,782 CTNF 100256 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-27 AIA Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2023-010020 , filed on 1/26/2023 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srinivasan (US PGP 2017/0082937) in view of Wada (JP 2018/045093) . Srinivasan teaches a core shell toner containing a binder resin and a borax coupling agent ([0021]). The circularity of the toner particle is preferably 0.93 to 0.98 ([0023]), and the exemplary toner has a circularity of 0.978 ([0041]). The shell formation for Example Toner A includes adding 1.5g of borax and 23.3 parts Polyester Resin Emulsion A ([0040]). This is a similar amount of borax added at the same point in the process of making the toner as in the instant application, and therefore, a fragment peak derived from boron and a fragment peak derived from a boron-oxygen structure would be detected in a TOF-SIMS measurement. Similarly, an abundance of a boron atom in the toner measured by ICP-MS would fall in the range of 0.1 to 2.00 ppm. As the polyester resin encapsulates the core particles, there would not be any crystalline material in the shell layer in a cross section of the toner particle. The thickness of the shell layer is not disclosed. However, toner particles have an average particle size of about 5 µm to 7 µm, and a ratio of the amount of binder resin in the core to the amount of resin in the shell is between 50:50 and 80:20. Based on these numbers, a shell thickness in the range of 300 to 700 nm would be easily achieved. Srinivasan teaches that the toner may have various external additives such as silica ([0029]), but is silent regarding the silica forming aggregates. Wada teaches a toner containing a binder and aggregated silica particles (Abstract). The aggregated silica particles provide a spacer effect that prevents buildup of the toner on the developing roller, and are not easily detached from the toner particle, losing the effect ([0005-8]). The result is a toner that is less likely to cause a burn-in phenomenon and deterioration in charging performance even when the image formation is continuously performed for a long time ([0009]). The aggregated silica particles include four or more silica particles having a primary particle size of at least 20 nm ([0011]). The primary particle size of the silica is preferably 30 to 100 nm ([0012]). The aggregated particles have a shape represented by Figure 1 (a) and (b). Based on the configuration of the aggregated particles and the primary particle size of the silica, they would be expected to have a maximum Feret’s diameter between 110 nm and 500 nm and an aspect ratio between 1.5 and 4. This shape allows for the external additive to have more points of contact with the toner particle, so the particles are not easily separated from the toner ([0069]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the toner of Srinivasan to have included the aggregated silica particles of Wada in order to prevent the bur-in phenomenon and deterioration in charging performance. The silica is preferably subjected to a hydrophobic treatment ([0074] line 4-6). The addition amount of the silica is preferably 1 to 5 parts with respect to 100 parts of the toner ([0075]). The exemplary silica particles 1-4 are produced by a flame hydrolysis of silicon tetrachloride with hydrogen and oxygen gas and treated with HMDS as the hydrophobic treatment ([0137-140]). These particles are used in an amount of 1 part to 100 parts of the toner ([0145-146]). As these particles are produced in a similar manner to the particles of the instant application, using the same compounds, they would be expected to satisfy Expression (1) of pending claim 1 after a titration operation. Further, the coverage ratio and the evaluation index for degree of dispersion would be expected to fall in the ranges of claims 3 and 4, respectively, as the type and amount of the silica particle is similar. Particularly, exemplary silica particle S3 of Wada has a diameter of 30 nm, similar to most of the exemplary silica of the instant application. As the modified toner of Srinivasan and Wada would produce similar values for the amount of silanol and abundance of boron to those of the instant application, the ratio S/B would be expected to fall within the range of claim 6 . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srinivasan and Wada as applied to claim s 1-4 and 6-8 above, and further in view of Sakamoto (US PGP 2016/0313659) . The entire discussion of Srinivasan and Wada above is included herein. Wada teaches that the external additive may further comprise another fine particle, such as titanium oxide ([0074] line 1-2), but is silent regarding the dimensions of the particle. Sakamoto teaches a toner particle including inorganic oxide particles having a major axis diameter of 500 nm to 3,000 nm and an aspect ratio of 2 to 20 (Abstract). The inorganic oxide particles improves the ease of toner cleaning for circular toner particles ([0019],[0080]). Further, the fluidity of the toner can also be improved ([0020]). The aspect ratio of the inorganic oxide is preferably at least 11 ([0082] line 6-7). The major axis diameter of the particles is equivalent to the maximum Feret’s diameter. The inorganic oxide particles may be titanium oxide particle ([0084]), and the exemplary particles are titanium oxide (Table 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the toner of Srinivasan and Wada to have included the acicular titanium oxide particles of Sakamoto in order to improve the fluidity and cleaning property of the toner . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srinivasan and Wada as applied to claim s 1-4 and 6-8 above, and further in view of Kidokoro (US PGP 2006/0154163) . The entire discussion of Srinivasan and Wada above is included herein. Srinivasan and Wada are silent regarding the toner comprising dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid or dodecylbenzenesulfonate. Kidokoro teaches a toner comprising an anionic surfactant, which can narrow the particle diameter distribution of the toner particles and improve the sharpness of the image ([0091]). The anionic surfactant may include sulfonic acid and salts thereof, such as dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, and sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate ([0092]). The exemplary toner includes both of these compounds ([0136-137]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the toner of Srinivasan and Wada to have included dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid and/or sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate in order to improve the sharpness of the image. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jenna Kuipers whose telephone number is (571)272-0161. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:30 PT. 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. /J.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1734 /PETER L VAJDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 06/02/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/418,782 Page 2 Art Unit: 1734 Application/Control Number: 18/418,782 Page 3 Art Unit: 1734 Application/Control Number: 18/418,782 Page 4 Art Unit: 1734 Application/Control Number: 18/418,782 Page 5 Art Unit: 1734 Application/Control Number: 18/418,782 Page 6 Art Unit: 1734 Application/Control Number: 18/418,782 Page 7 Art Unit: 1734
Prosecution Insights