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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The chemical formulas on pages 3, 5, 9, 11, 23, 25, and 50 are blurry and difficult to read.
Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the . A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “ppm” in claims 1-13is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ppm” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. "ppm" is not a standardized term, and can been used to refer to both the mole fraction and the mass fraction. However, the specification does not define which "ppm" is intended.
For the sake of compact prosecution, “ppm” will be evaluated as a mass fraction.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoshi (US 20030190540) in view of Nakamura (US 20210024752).
Regarding claims 1-4, and 6-7, Shoshi discloses an electrophotographic photoconductor comprising a conductive support and a photoconductive layer on the support (claim 1, [0024]). However, Shoshi does not disclose a cyclic siloxane contained in the outer layer in a total amount of 0.0010 ppm or greater.
Nakamura teaches a cured resin product which is less likely to shrink and crack at high temperatures, when stacked on a substrate ([0023]). Nakamura further teaches the resin includes an alicyclic epoxide ([0034]). Nakamura further teaches the Alicyclic epoxide may have a silicone chain selected from (3-1) to (3-4) ([0046]).
PNG
media_image1.png
46
264
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
46
264
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
158
278
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
155
264
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Nakamura further teaches the ratio of the weight of the epoxide to weight of the resin (We) to the weight of the silsesquioxane resin (Ws), We/Ws, is 0.005-5 ([0047]). In other words, the weight ratio of the epoxide, We = 0.005Ws to 5Ws, and We/(We+Ws) = 0.005Ws/(0.005Ws+Ws) = 0.00495 = 4975ppm or more. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the photoconductor of Shoshi includes an acyclic epoxide, as taught by Nakamura, to prevent shrinking and cracking of the resin.
Regarding claims 12-13, modified Shoshi discloses all limitations as set forth above. Shoshi further discloses the photoconductor is used in a process cartridge which is freely attachable and detachable to an electrophotographic device ([0292]). Shoshi further discloses an apparatus for forming image comprising the photoconductor, an electrostatic charger, an image exposing means, a development unit for developing the image with toner, and a transfer means (Fig. 1, [0760]-[0764])
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoshi (US 20030190540) in view of Nakamura (US 20210024752) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ikeda (US 20100014888).
Regarding claims 10-11, modified Shoshi discloses all limitations as set forth above. However, Shoshi does not disclose the surface roughness of the outermost layer.
Ikeda teaches an electrophotographic photosensitive member including a conductive body, a photoconductive layer, and a surface layer ([0001], [0013]). Ikeda further teaches the surface roughness Ra of the surface layer is not more than 10 nm ([0015]). Ikeda further teaches by setting the surface roughness of the surface layer, discharge products from corona discharge are not adsorbed, and are easily removed by cleaning. ([0028]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the surface of the photoconductor of Shoshi has a surface roughness Ra of not more than 10 nm, as taught by Ikeda, to prevent discharge products from being adsorbed on the surface, and improve cleaning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES COLLINS SULLIVAN IV whose telephone number is (571)272-2208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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, Mark Huff can be reached at (571) 272-1385. 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.
/C.C.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/MARK F. HUFF/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1737