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. 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 . This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hishida et al. (US-20240066874-A1) ( hereinafter referred to as “ Hishida ” ) in view of Haijima (US-20150077465-A1) ( hereinafter referred to as “ Haijima ” ). Regarding claim s 1 and 3 , Hishida teaches a n ink set (see Hishida at para. 0007, teaching an ink set including a maintenance liquid and an ink) comprising: • an inkjet ink (see Hishida at para. 0057 and 0082, teaching an inkjet ink) ; and • a cleaning liquid that contains water, a water-soluble organic solvent, and a metal salt A, and has a conductivity of 0.10 to 3.0 mS/cm at 5°C (0.20 to 2.0 mS/cm, regarding claim 3) (see Hishida at para. 0022, teaching the maintenance liquid as being used as a cleaning liquid; also see Hishida at para. 0050, teaching the maintenance liquid as containing water; also see Hishida at para. 0039-0041, teaching the maintenance liquid may include a water-soluble organic compound, such as an organic solvent like ethylene glycol monomethyl ether; also see Hishida at para. 0025 and 0028, teaching the maintenance liquid may contain an ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid compound, such as tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate; tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate is a metal salt; also see Hishida at para. 0010, teaching the electrical conductivity of the maintenance liquid to range from 100 µS/cm or more, which is equivalent to a range of 0.1 mS/cm; also see Hishida at para. 0053, teaching the electrical conductivity to be measured at 25 °C; electrical conductivity for aqueous solutions is generally directly proportional to temperature , i.e., the lower the temperature, the lower the conductivity ; thus , given Hishida teaches an electrical conductivity of 0.1 mS/cm or more at 25 °C, it necessarily follows that at a lower temperature of 5 °C compared to 25 °C , the electrical conductivity of the maintenance liquid of Hishida necessarily ranges from “X” mS/cm or greater, where “ X ” is a value less than 0.1 (e.g., 0.0001 mS/cm or greater) ; such a range necessarily overlaps the claimed range, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness, see MPEP § 2144.05 ) . While Hishida teaches the ink set outlined above, Hishida fails to explicitly teach (1.) the maintenance liquid as containing a surfactant with an HLB value of 10 or more , and (2) the ink set as further comprising an inkjet pretreatment liquid containing an aggregating agent. Regarding (1), Haijima teaches a maintenance liquid for inkjet recording comprising a compound represented by Formula (I), a water-soluble organic solvent represented by Formula (II), a moisturizing agent, and water (see Haijima at para. 0038). Haijima further teaches the compound represented by Formula (I) as being a surfactant having an HLB value of 10.5 to 13.8 (see Haijima at para. 0043). Moreover, Haijima teaches the surfactant penetrates into the ink-derived solids and accelerates the solubility of the ink-derived solids , thereby preventing ejection problems (see Haijima at para. 0043). Additionally, Haijima teaches the HLB to be 10.5 to 13.8 in order to reduce aggregation defects and reduce deterioration in cleaning performance (see Haijima at para. 0050). Additionally, Haijima teaches the maintenance liquid as containing a water-soluble organic solvent represented by formula (II), such as ethylene glycol monomethyl ether, in combination with the surfactant in order to improve cleaning ability (see Haijima at para. 0057 and 0060). Hishida teaches their maintenance liquid may contain a water-soluble organic compound, such as an organic solvent or a surfactant (see Hishida at para. 0040). Hishida further teaches their organic solvent may include ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (see Hishida at para. 0041). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use both the surfactant represented by Formula (I) having an HLB value of 10.5 to 13.8 of Haijima in combination with the organic solvent of Hishida , e.g., ethylene glycol monomethyl ether, as the water-soluble organic compound in the maintenance liquid of Hishida . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order for the surfactant to penetrate into the ink-derived solids and accelerate the solubility of the ink-derived solids , thereby preventing ejection problems, to reduce aggregation defects and reduce deterioration in cleaning performance, and to improve cleaning ability (see Haijima at para. 0043, 0050, 0057, and 0060). Following the above modification, the maintenance liquid of modified Hishida contai ns a surfactant having an HLB value of 10.5 to 13.8, which falls within the claimed range. Regarding (2), Haijima teaches an ink set containing a maintenance liquid, an ink composition, and a treatment liquid (see Haijima at para. 0026-0027). Haijima further teaches the treatment liquid contains an aggregating component to aggregate components in the ink composition, and that the treatment liquid may be applied by an inkjet method (see Haijima at para. 00252-0253). Moreover, Haijima teaches the treatment liquid may be applied onto the recording medium before application of the ink, and that in doing so, an image having high density and high resolution can be obtained even when recording speed is high (see Haijima at para. 0264). Additionally, Haijima teaches the recording medium may be plain paper (see Haijima at para. 0230). In general, treatment liquids are ubiquitous in the ink art and are well-known to aggregate ink components to improve image density. Hishida teaches their recording medium may be plain paper (see Hishida at para. 0097). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the treatment liquid of Haijima together with the ink and maintenance liquid of modified Hishida in an ink set. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to aggregate the ink components once the ink lands on the paper, thus improving image density and resolution, even when recording speed is high (see Haijima at para. 0264). Regarding claim 2 , see Hishida at para. 0028, teaching the ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid compounds may include compounds produced by substituting potassium for the sodium salts; accordingly, Hishida necessarily teaches tetrapotassium ethylenediaminetetraacetate as a suitable compound, which is a potassium salt. Regarding claim 4 , the maintenance liquid of modified Hishida above does not contain an additional surfactant; accordingly, modified Hishida reads on the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Jeffrey E Barzach whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-8735 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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 FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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