/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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The tables disclosed in paragraphs [0513] and [0522] are blurry and difficult to read. Applicant’s cooperation is respectfully requested in identifying and replacing any other blurry tables/figures not listed above, along with a statement that any amendments contain no new matter.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, the word “a” appears to be missing between “of” and “difference”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujita et al. (US PGP 2018/0224761 A1).
Fujita teaches an electrophotographic photoreceptor configured on a conductive support including a charge generating layer, a charge transporting layer, and a protective layer ([0064]-[0065]). The protective layer is taught to include a cured composition having a radical polymerizable compound for a binder, a charge transport agent having a radical polymerizable functional group, and a photopolymerization initiator ([0008]). The protective layer is further taught to contain metal oxide particles as inorganic particles ([0065]) (which reads on the corresponding limitation recited in instant claim 4). Examples of the metal oxide particles are taught to include silica particles ([0138]) (which reads on the corresponding limitation recited in instant claim 5).
An image forming apparatus comprising a charger, an exposure device, a developing device, and the electrophotographic photoreceptor is also discussed ([0250]-[0270]) (which reads on the corresponding limitation recited in instant claim 11).
PNG
media_image1.png
72
276
media_image1.png
Greyscale
An example of a polyfunctional radical polymerizable compound used as a binder is taught to include the compound M1, shown below ([0095]) (which corresponds to the polymerizable monomer having no charge transport structure recited in instant claim 1):
PNG
media_image2.png
172
364
media_image2.png
Greyscale
An example of the charge transport agent contained in the protective layer is taught to include the compound CTM-147, shown below ([0131]) (which corresponds to the charge transporting material recited in instant claim 1):
The compound CTM-147 is identical to the Compound F disclosed in paragraph [0429] of the instant specification. According to Table II, the Compound F has an ionization potential IP2 of 5.62 eV (see [0430] of the instant specification). Therefore, it follows that the compound CTM-147 also has an ionization potential IP2 of 5.62 eV.
PNG
media_image3.png
230
292
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Another example of the charge transport agent contained in the protective layer is taught to include the compound RTCM-26, shown below ([0134]) (which corresponds with the polymerizable monomer having a charge transporting structure recited in instant claim 1):
The compound RCTM-26 is nearly identical to the Compound D disclosed in paragraph [0423] of the instant specification. According to Table I, the Compound D has an ionization potential IP1 of 5.65 eV (see [0430] of the instant specification). Therefore, the compound RCTM-26 would also be expected to have an ionization potential IP1 of about 5.65 eV.
When the compound CTM-147 and the compound RCTM-26 are used in combination, the absolute value of a difference in ionization potential between the polymerizable monomer having the charge transporting structure (compound RCTM-26) and the charge transporting material (CTM-147) would be about 0.03 eV (which reads on the corresponding limitation recited in instant claim 3).
In the examples, a photoreceptor was produced according to a method including: forming a charge generating layer by preparing a coating liquid containing a titanyl phthalocyanine ([0284]), forming a charge transport layer by preparing a coating liquid containing a charge transport agent ([0285]), and forming a protective layer by preparing a coating liquid containing a radical polymerizable compound represented by formula M1 (which corresponds to the polymerizable monomer having no charge transporting structure recited in instant claim 1), a charge transport agent containing a radical polymerizable functional group represented by formula RCTM-1, a photopolymerization initiator commercially known as “Irgacure 819”, and 2-butanol ([0286]). According to paragraph [0247] of the instant specification, 2-butanol is a solvent having an SP value of 11.4 [(cal/cm3)1/2] and a carbon number of 4 (which reads on the corresponding limitations recited in instant claim 9 and claim 10).
The charge transport layer was taught to have a thickness of 20 µm, and the protective layer was taught to have a thickness of 3 µm ([0285], [0291]). Therefore, a total thickness of the charge transport layer and the protective layer was 23 µm (which reads on the corresponding limitation recited in instant claim 2). Additionally, the silica particles contained in the protective layer are taught to have been surface-treated with a surface modifying agent “S-15" having a radically polymerizable group and having an acryl group ([0289]-[0291]) (which reads on the corresponding limitation recited in instant claim 5, claim 6, and claim 7).
Fujita appears to be silent to explicitly teach the amount of the charge transporting material diffused/transferred from the charge transporting layer to the protective layer (corresponding to the claimed charge transport material ratio1). However, the method of producing the photoreceptor taught by Fujita is sufficiently similar to the method of producing the claimed photoreceptor disclosed in the specification. That is, both Fujita and the Applicant teach sufficiently similar methods of preparing the charge generating layer, the charge transporting layer, the protective layer, and the surface-treated silica particles (see [0279]-[0291] of Fujita and [0374]-[0393] of the instant specification).
According to the instant specification, the solvent having a solubility parameter of 10.0 [(cal/cm3)1/2] or more and a molecular structure of 4 or more carbon atoms is used to control the transfer amount of the charge transporting material from the charge transporting layer to the protective layer (see [0022] of the instant specification). Since both Fujita and the Applicant teach the use of 2-butanol as a solvent in the protective layer, Fujita’s photoreceptor would be expected to necessarily exhibit a sufficiently similar charge transport material diffusion/migration rate as the Applicant’s photoreceptor, and thus would be expected to exhibit sufficiently similar charge transport material ratios (as recited in instant claim 1 and claim 8).
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.
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US PGP 2018/0224761 A1), in view of Maeda et al. (US PGP 2018/0143545 A1).
The teachings of Fujita are discussed above and incorporated herein. Fujita appears to be silent to teach a proximity charging roller and a contact charging roller as an example of the charger of the image forming apparatus.
However, such configuration was previously known in prior art. For example, Maeda teaches an image forming apparatus comprising a charger of a proximity charging system (the roller charging system) for applying a charging voltage in proximity to (including an aspect of being in contact with) the surface of an electrophotographic photoreceptor. Maeda teaches that having such a configuration is suppresses discharge degradation, improves abrasion resistance, and provides excellent imaging ([0024]-[0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized a proximity/contact charging roller as the charger in the image forming apparatus of Fujita, in view of achieving the benefits taught by Maeda.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US PGP 2018/0224761 A1), in view of Maeda et al. (US PGP 2018/0143545 A1), and further in view of Ishikawa et al. (US PGP 2018/0314175 A1).
The teachings of Fujita and Maeda are discussed above and incorporated herein. Fujita appears to be silent to teach the composition of the toners/developers used in the image forming apparatus. Therefore, Fujita is silent to teach that the developer contains a lubricant, or that the lubricant is a metal soap.
However, such compositions were previously known in prior art. For example, Ishikawa teaches that toner added with small-diameter lubricants (fatty acid metal salt particles) is known to achieve higher image quality and higher stability of an image output from an image forming apparatus ([0003]). The lubricant/fatty acid metal salt is taught to include zinc stearate (a metal soap) from the viewpoint of performance as a lubricant and electrostatic toner retentivity ([0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized a developer having a metal soap lubricant as the toner in the image forming apparatus of Fujita, in view of achieving the benefits taught by Ishikawa.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Boone A Evans whose telephone number is (571)272-1420. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
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 on (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.
/BOONE ALEXANDER EVANS/Examiner, Art Unit 1737
03/21/2026
1 (mass of a charge transporting material contained in the protective layer)/(mass of a charge transporting material contained in the protective layer + mass of a reactant of a polymerizable monomer having a charge transporting structure and a polymerizable monomer having no charge transport structure) x 100