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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 6/1/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 and 12-14 remain pending. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 10-11 have been cancelled. Claims 15-17 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed 6/1/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 7 under 35 US 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204).
Applicant argues Nagai does not disclose or teach white toners. Examiner agrees Nagai does not disclose a white toner. However, Fujii teaches a white toner containing high purity titanium oxide as a pigment to enable a white toner which has reduced hydroscopicity. The reduced hydroscopicity prevents of agglomeration of the toner and improves uniformity of charge due to moisture absorption.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed 6/1/2026, with respect to claims 10 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 10 and 11 has been withdrawn.
Applicant has cancelled claims 10 and 11, rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5-7, filed 6/1/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 4-14 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204), further in view Fujisaki (US 20160291492), Noriyuki (JP 5454379), Doujo (US 5660963), Koruda (US 6180298, Hatada (US 6284349) and/or Takama (US 5822671).
Applicant argues none of the secondary references teach modifying Nagai to be a white toner. Examiner agrees none of the previous references suggest a white toner. However, as discussed above, Fujii teaches a white toner containing high purity titanium oxide as a pigment to enable a white toner which has reduced hydroscopicity. The reduced hydroscopicity prevents of agglomeration of the toner and improves uniformity of charge due to moisture absorption.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Nagai discloses a toner comprising a substance with a glass transition point of -90 to 5 °C and a substance with a softening point of 25-180 °C (abstract, Col 3 line 31-42). Nagai further discloses Example 2 comprising a glass transition temperature of -3° and a softening point of 25°C (Col 17 line 10-17). However, Nagai does not disclose a white toner.
Fujii teaches by using a high purity TiO2 pigment with under 0.1% by weight Al2O3 and under 0.05% by weight SiO2, a white toner can be produced with good stability in high temperature and high humidity environments (abstract, Col 5 line 25-33). Fujii further teaches by using high purity TiO2 pigment the toner is less hydroscopic, preventing moisture absorption which can cause agglomeration and nonuniformity in charge (abstract Col 1 line 25-35). Fujii further teaches the white toner produces images free from blurring and background fog, even in extended operating times (Col 5 line 25-33). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a high quality TiO2 pigment in the toner of Nagai to produce a white toner with reduced fogging and blurring, as taught by Fujii.
Regarding claim 7, modified Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. Nagai further discloses the toner has a particle size of preferably 5-30 µm, with an outer wall thickness of 0.05-3 µm (Col 16 line 16-24). Nagai further discloses the particle size of the core as 15µm (Col 17 line 32-34). Therefore, even with the maximum outer wall 3µm, the average particle size would be 18µm.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 15 above, and further in view of Fujisaki (US 20160291492).
Regarding claim 2-3, modified Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. However, Nagai does not disclose a sea-island structure.
Fujisaki teaches a toner comprising a fibrous structure the cross section of the toner particle ([0010]). The fibrous structure forming domains with a major diameter of 0.2-1 µm and a minor diameter of 0.01-0.5 µm ([0064]). In other words an aspect ratio of 1 (to be a major diameter it would have to be as big or larger than the minor diameter), to 1/0.01 = 100. Fujisaki further teaches the ratio of cross sectional area of the fibrous structure is 1-50% of the toner particle ([0066]). Fujisaki further teaches the presence of a matrix phase with the domain phase ([0067], [0071], [0076]). Fujisaki further teaches the by including the fibrous structure toner fixability at high speed is improved and a low fixable temperature range is achieved ([0015], [0066]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the toner of Nagai included fibrous domain structures in a matrix, as taught by Fujisaki, to improve low temperature fixability and high-speed fixability.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 15 above, and further in view of Noriyuki (JP 5454379).
Regarding claim 4, Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. Nagai further discloses polymers of urethanes and polyester resins may be used (Col 5 line 3-12, Co 5 line 62 to Col 6 line 2). However, Nagai does not disclose the specific combination of both.
Noriyuki teaches a toner comprising a binder with a matrix-domain structure, specifically with a domain made of polyurethane (abstract, page 2, claims). Noriyuki further teaches the polyurethane is in a matrix of styrene acrylic or polyester resin, with specific examples of polyester included (page 3-4 and 8). Noriyuki further teaches the matrix domain structure, using polyurethane domains, hot offset is prevented (page 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the toner of Nagai includes a matrix-domain structure having polyurethane domains and a polyester resin, as taught by Noriyuki, to prevent hot offset.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) and Fujisaki (US 20160291492) as applied to claims 2-3 above, and further in view of Noriyuki (JP 5454379).
Regarding claim 5, Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. Nagai further discloses polymers of urethanes and polyester resins may be used (Col 5 line 3-12, Co 5 line 62 to Col 6 line 2). However, Nagai does not disclose the specifically using polyurethane as a domain.
Noriyuki teaches a toner comprising a binder with a matrix-domain structure, specifically with a domain made of polyurethane (abstract, page 2, claims). Noriyuki further teaches the polyurethane is in a matrix of styrene acrylic or polyester resin, with specific examples of polyester included (page 3-4 and 8). Noriyuki further teaches the matrix domain structure, using polyurethane domains, hot offset is prevented (page 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the toner of Nagai includes a matrix-domain structure having polyurethane domains and a polyester resin, as taught by Noriyuki, to prevent hot offset.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) and Noriyuki (JP 5454379) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Doujo (US 5660963).
Regarding claim 6, modified Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. Nagai further discloses the core material having a glass transition temperature (Tg) of -90 to 5°C, and the substance having a softening temperature (Tsp) between 25-180°C both include urethane resins (Col 4 line 47 to Col 5 line 15, and Col 5 line 23 to Col 6 line 15).
Noriyuki further teaches the polyurethane resin domains is 1-5 % by mass (abstract, page 2,claims). However, Nagai and Noriyuki do not disclose or teach the polyester’s glass transition temperature or softening temp.
Doujo teaches a toner comprising polyester resins with softening points between 120-180°C and 80-120°C (abstract, Col 6 line 8-21). Doujo further teaches the polyester resins a glass transition temperature of 40-90°C, which specifically improves fixability, anti-offset and anti-blocking (Col 9 line 49-60). Doujo further teaches the polyester resins are used in a matrix-domain structure, and constitutes the matrix (Col 15 line 3-8). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to ensure the matrix of modified Nagai includes polyesters having softening temperatures of 120-180°C and 80-120°C and a glass temperature of 40-90°C, as taught by Doujo, for improved fixability while preventing offset and blocking.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 15 above, and further in view of Kuroda (US 6180298).
Regarding claim 8, modified Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. However Nagai does not disclose a toner set.
Kuroda teaches a multi-color toner set including a plurality of color toners, allowing multi-color images to be formed with improved durability and image transfer performance (abstract, Col 2 line 65 to Col 3 line 4). Kuroda further teaches the toners comprise a binder resin and a pigment (Col 3 line 11-20). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the toner of Nagai in a multi-color toner set, as taught by Kuroda, to allow multi-color image formation with improved durability and image transfer performance.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 15 above, and further in view of Hatada (US 6284349).
Regarding claim 9, modified Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. However, Nagai does not disclose an image transfer sheet.
Hatada teaches an image transfer sheet comprising an image transfer layer free of wrinkling and a method of forming a toner image on the sheet, able to be transferred to an image receiving material with excellent image transfer performance (Col 2 line 30-46). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the toner of Nagai on an image transfer sheet free of wrinkles, as taught by Hatada, to enable excellent image transfer of high quality images.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai (US 4708924) in view of Fujii (US 4855204) as applied to claims 1, 7, and 15 above, and further in view of Takama (US 5822671).
Regarding claims 12-14, modified Nagai discloses all limitations as set forth above. However, Nagai does not disclose an image forming process.
Takama teaches an image forming method including a process forming an electrostatic latent image on the surface of a photosensitive drum, developing the latent image with toner from the developing unit, transferring the toner image to a recording medium on the surface of the transfer drum, and fixing the image on the recording member using the fixing unit (Col 7 line 14-63). Takama further teaches the image forming apparatus forms images on fabric including fiber or nonwoven fabric, and does not adversely effect the fabric (Col 1 line 8-12 and 60-65, Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the image forming apparatus and developing devices of Takama with the toner of Nagai to enable printing on fabric without adversely effecting the fabric recording medium.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-17 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The added limitation of claim 16, “wherein the polyurethane resin accounts for 10 to 40 percent by mass of the entirety of the binder resin and the releasing agent”, in combination with the limitations of the parent claim, claim 6, is not taught or disclosed in the art. When polyurethane is used with polyester in the toner of the art, it does not fall within the claimed range in toners which are white or would be obvious to one of skill in the art to modify to a white toner, while meeting all limitations of the claim.
The closest available art Nakamura (US 20210253845) teaches the specific limitation of the claim, with Example 1. The colorant containing particles comprise a polyester-polyurethane copolymer which is mixed with a dye, and used in producing toner particles with 35 mass% of the toner particles ([0277]-[0304]). However, Nakamura is specifically limited to fluorescent toners, with the inclusion of polyurethane specific to improving the dispersion, fluorescence intensity, and tine of the colorant, which would not cover a white toner, nor would it be obvious to modify to a white toner.
The added limitation of claim 17, regarding the molecular weight of the polyurethane resin, combined with the limitations of the parent claims 6, 4, and 1, is not disclosed rendered obvious by the available art. The available art which teaches using a polyurethane resin in a toner with a molecular weight within the claimed range are all specifically crystalline polyurethanes, which normally include a melting temperature instead of a glass transition temperature.
The closest available art Nakayama (US20130244153) does teach using a polyurethane resin with weight average molecular weights of 2,000-100,000. However, the polyurethane resin is specifically crystalline polyurethane, comprising a melting point instead of a glass transition temperature and a softening point, Tf, well above the claimed range in claim 6 ([0033]-[0039], [0164], Table 1 [0556]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (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.
/C.C.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 1737
/PETER L VAJDA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 08/10/2026
Prosecution Insights