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 with traverse of Group I, claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 8/4/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is not a serious burden to search all claims. This is not found persuasive because the different groups have separate status in the art and there is nothing of record to show them as obvious variants.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 8/4/2026.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.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deighton et al. (US 10,113,077), in view of Xu et al. (CN-112778867-A).
Regarding claim 1
Deighton discloses a water-based ink composition comprising at least one self-crosslinking acrylic polymer and a silicone emulsion (abstract, claims 1 and 16).
Deighton does not disclose the MFFT of the acrylic. However, Xu discloses that in similar acrylic compositions used for coating, that the MFFT of the acrylic resin should be between 0 to 25 C (Specific implementation examples). Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to add to the teachings of Deighton by using an acrylic resin with a MFFT between 0 to 25 C, with a reasonable expectation of success, as suggested by Xu.
Regarding claim 2
Deighton discloses the use of 20 to 60 wt % of the acrylic polymer (claim 8). Although the range of the reference does not overlap the claimed range there is not such a difference between 20 wt % and less than 20 wt % that a skilled artisan would expect a difference in properties, and a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 3
The range taught by the reference overlaps the claimed amount, as such the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have selected the overlapping portion of the range disclosed by the reference because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 U.S.P.Q. 549.
Regarding claim 4
Deighton discloses the use of a colorant that is a pigment dispersion (claim 11).
Regarding claim 5
Deighton discloses the use of Maa, MMA, butyl acrylate, butyl methacrylate, styrene and methyl styrene as the self-crosslinking acrylic polymer (claim 3).
Regarding claims 6-7
Deighton discloses the use of a styrene/acrylic ester copolymer formed from a carbonyl/amine reaction (claim 4).
Regarding claims 8-9
Deighton discloses the use of a silicon emulsion with a high molecular weight polydimethylsiloxane elusion containing reactive silanol groups (claim 7).
Regarding claims 10-11
Deighton discloses the use of between 0.2 to 3 wt % silicone emulsion (claim 10).
Regarding claim 12
Deighton discloses the use of 5 to 50 wt % of the pigment dispersion (claim 13).
Regarding claim 13
Deighton discloses the use of additives such as wetting aids (claim 14).
Regarding claim 14
Deighton discloses the ink is a gravure or flexographic printing ink (claim 15).
Regarding claim 15
Deighton discloses that the composition is substantially free of epoxyesters (claim 19).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES E MCDONOUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-6398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-10.
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 5712721177. 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.
JAMES E. MCDONOUGH
Examiner
Art Unit 1734
/JAMES E MCDONOUGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights