CTNF 18/509,462 CTNF 89928 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 7-20 allowed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rozzi US Pat. (6,633,408) in view of Cho (KR20090042612) . Regarding claim 1, Rozzi teaches deriving absorbance (OD) from reflectance and modeling concentration effects (measuring spectral reflectance or transmittance of the dyes at various concentrations) and teaches optical density (OD or absorbance) is calculated (estimated) from wavelength dependent OD (spectrum related absorbance) with reflectance being converted to K/S and optical density is derived from transmittance at various concentrations and therefore teaches measuring a spectrum related to an absorption ratio or absorbance of a mixed dye from a reflection ratio by concentration for each of the dyes. Rozzi is silent regarding the claimed memory configured to store for each of the dyes. However, Cho teaches storing data with absorbance spectra of each component being used in order to be used a data for processes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the storing data with absorbance spectra of each component being used of Cho in Rozzi in order to be used a data for processes and arrive at the claimed invention. The previous combination is silent regarding the claimed dyes being monochromatic. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art use monochromatic dyes given the limited number of options (monochromatic or polychromatic). Regarding claim 2, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine absorbance per dye at different concentrations from reflectance data for preset wavelength range because if you have reflectance (R) then K/S which is absorption related can be calculated and since K/S changes with concentration the it would have been obvious to determine absorbance per dye at different concentrations in order to estimate absorbance and determine absorption parameters. Regarding claim 3, Color systems inherently operate in the visible with the preset wavelength range is a wavelength corresponding to visible light since the entire rationale for color matching is to operate in visible wavelengths. Regarding claim 4, It is known the mixture property of Kubelka Munk is the sum of components and each dye has its own spectral properties with absorption varying per concentration as is taught in Rozzi and Cho. Rozzi teaches determining absorbance (optical density) of dyes as a function of concentration and Cho teaches storing spectral properties of individual dyes and combining them to determine properties. Therefore, since each dye has an absorption versus concentration relationship and mixture are combination of dyes, then the absorption of the mixture can be determined from the absorption of each dye. It would have been obvious to use the absorbance values of individual dyes determined as a function of concentration to estimate the absorbance of a mixed dye and arrive at the claimed invention. Regarding claim 5, It is well known in the art that the optical properties of mixtures can be determined by summing the contributions of individual components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the processor estimate the absorbance of mixed dye by summing absorbance values of individual dyes under preset mixing conditions in order to determine optical properties and arrive at the claimed invention. Regarding claim 6, It is known in the art to specify mixture compositions in terms of component identities, concentrations, and mixing ratios. All color mixing systems requires determining which dyes to use and how much of each. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the mixing conditions to include information on target monochromatic dyes that are used in the formation of the mixed dye by being mixed, a concentration of each target monochromatic dye and a mixing ratio between monochromatic dyes used in order to form the final dye and arrive at the claimed invention. Art Not Used But Relevant PG Pub. 2006/0200318 teaches estimation method od dye concentration. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN MCKINNON whose telephone number is (571)272-6116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday generally 8:00am-5:00pm 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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. /Shawn Mckinnon/Examiner, Art Unit 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/509,462 Page 2 Art Unit: 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/509,462 Page 3 Art Unit: 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/509,462 Page 4 Art Unit: 1789 Application/Control Number: 18/509,462 Page 5 Art Unit: 1789