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
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.
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(s) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki et al (US PGP 2012/0052430) in view of JP 2018-095496 (henceforth JP ‘496).
Yamasaki teaches a toner comprising a core particle containing a binder resin and a coating layer on the core particle (Abstract). The coating layer is taught to contain a resin having a crosslinked structure formed by using a boric acid derivative (Abstract). Specifically, Yamasaki teaches that the coating layer comprise an amount of the boric acid derivative in the range of 5 to 500 parts by mass of the amount of the monomer ([0082]) wherein the total amount of monomers in the coating layer is 0.1 to 50 parts by mass based on 100 parts of the core particles ([0084]). In embodiments 0.7 parts of trimethyl borate is added to 3.4 parts of total monomers and therefore 17 parts per 100 parts total monomers (0.7 parts boric acid + 3.4 parts acrylate monomers = 4.1 total monomers and 0.7 parts boric acid/4.1 total monomers = 0.17 x 100 parts = 17 parts; see [0209]). The Applicant a 10% by mass aqueous borax solution in an amount of 19.0 parts or 1.9 parts borax with 40 parts of a 20% by mass aqueous resin particle dispersion 1 or 4.0 parts of resin ([0185-186] and [0190] of the instant specification). As such, the Applicant utilizes 32 parts borax per 100 parts of the coating material (1.9 parts borax + 4.0 parts resin solids = 5.9 total parts solids and 1.9 parts borax/5.9 total parts solids x 100 total parts = 32 parts borax). The amount of boric acid derivative taught by Yamasaki in embodiments is 17 parts by mass borax, which is less than what is taught by Yamasaki in the cited embodiment, however, Yamasaki teaches a functional range of 5 to 500 parts boric acid derivative and a preferable range of 20 to 200 parts by mass of the boric acid derivate based on the total amount of monomers in the coating layer ([0082]). As such, the coating layer of the toner particles of Yamasaki are taught to contain boric acid derivates in the same amounts taught by the Applicant to produce an intensity of 0.10 kcps to 0.60 kcps in X-ray fluorescence measurement of the toner particles and are expected to inherently possess this feature. Furthermore, Yamasaki teaches the use of polyester resins in the core particles similar to what is taught by the Applicant and would therefore be expected to inherently possess the Ib/Ic ratio recited by the Applicant in pending claim 10 (see [0175-208] of Yamasaki and [0181-190] of the instant specification).
Yamasaki further teaches that the toner comprises external additives such as alumina (Al2O3) particles that are hydrophobically coated ([0109-113]). The amount of the external additives added to the toner is taught to be 0.01 parts by mass to 20 parts by mass relative to 100 parts by mass of the toner particles ([0115]). The particle size of the external additive is taught to be 1 to 200 nm ([0115]). The hydrophobic coating is further taught to be a silicon compound with a hydrocarbon moiety ([0113]). However, Yamasaki is silent regarding the hydrophobicity, volume resistivity and rate of atoms originated by the alumina particles.
JP ‘496 teaches a hydrophobic alumina particle for use as an external additive of a toner particle (Abstract). The alumina particle is taught to have volume resistivity of 105 x 1012 Ωcm, a carbon content of the surface of the particle of 1 to 15 mass% and a hydrophobicity of 70% or more (Abstract; [Surface treatment inorganic oxide powder]). These properties are taught to improve the chargeability, stability and hydrophobicity of the toner ([Surface treatment inorganic oxide powder]). Additionally, the alumina particles are taught to have a primary particle diameter of 5 to 150 nm ([Original inorganic oxide powder]). The hydrophobizing agent is taught to be an oligomeric reactive siloxane having an alkyl group such as dimethyl silicone oil ([Oligomer-like reactive siloxane]). The hydrophobizing agent may further be an alkyltrialkoxysilane as represented by the Applicant in formula (I) of pending claim 8 ([Oligomer-like reactive siloxane]). Based on the teaching of the specific advantages associated with the hydrophobic alumina particles of JP ‘496 it would have been obvious to any person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to have utilized said hydrophobic alumina particles of JP ‘496 as the external additives in the toner of Yamasaki. Additionally, based on the close similarity of the alumina particles of JP ‘496 to those taught by the Applicant such a combination would have inherently imparted the properties recited by the Applicant in pending claim 9 to the toner of Yamasaki.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER L VAJDA whose telephone number is (571)272-7150. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00 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, 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.
/PETER L VAJDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 06/22/2026
Prosecution Insights