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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/03/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding new claims 9-16, applicant argues, see the second to last paragraph on page 6, that Wilson in view of Yoichi does not disclose an inkjet ink set comprising specific yellow pigments that could be used and; therefore, should be patentable. The applicant’s argument has been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically in the argument. Please see the rejection below regarding Wilson in view of Yoichi and Hattori (JP 6821874 B2). Hattori discloses the yellow pigments that can be used including “C.I.I. Pigment Yellow” “17”, “83”, “128”, and “180” (Last paragraph on page 7).
Regarding claims 17-24, applicant argues, see the last paragraph on page 6 that continues onto page 7, that Wilson in view of Yoichi does not disclose an inkjet ink set comprising a specific magenta pigment and; therefore, should be patentable. The applicant’s argument has been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically in the argument. Please see the rejection below regarding Wilson in view of Yoichi and Hattori (JP 6821874 B2). Hattori discloses the magenta pigments that can be used including “C.I.I. Pigment Red” “146”, “150”, and “185” (the second to last paragraph of page 7).
Regarding claims 1-8, applicant argues that Wilson in view of Yoichi does not disclose an inkjet ink set comprising an aqueous inkjet ink compositions of five colors including aqueous yellow, magenta, cyan, black, and violet ink compositions and is therefore patentable. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees as a composition of five colors are patently indistinct and an obvious variation of the four colored composition. Furthermore, Wilson does disclose how the "ink-set" can be comprised of two or more different colored inks (Paragraph [0207-0208]).
Regarding the newly amended claim 1, applicant argues that Wilson in view of Yoichi does not specifically disclose the aqueous violet ink composition contains PV23. The applicant’s argument has been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically in the argument. Please see the rejection below regarding Wilson in view of Yoichi and Hattori (JP 6821874 B2). Hattori discloses the pigments that can be used including “C.I.I. Pigment Violet” “23” (Second to last paragraph on page 7).
Regarding the last argument, see the first paragraph on page 7, the applicant argues that the combination of Wilson and Yoichi does not suggest or disclose the unexpected results of combining an aqueous inkjet ink composition containing the specific combination of pigments with an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder. These unexpected results are exhibiting laminate strength and heat resistance. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees as Yoichi discloses how the inclusion of an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin can “suitably impart lamination strength” (last paragraph on page 6 that continues on page 7 and the second paragraph on page 7). Therefore, if the addition of an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin leads towards at least of the results mentioned by the applicant, it can functionally lead towards the other result.
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.
Claim(s) 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson et al. (US 20200048488 A1) in view of Yoichi et al. (JP 2020029484 A) and Hattori (JP 6821874 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Wilson teaches an inkjet ink set (Paragraph [0207] describes an inkjet ink set) comprising:
aqueous inkjet ink compositions of five colors, the aqueous inkjet ink compositions including an aqueous yellow ink composition, an aqueous magenta ink composition, an aqueous cyan ink composition, and an aqueous black ink composition, and an aqueous violet ink composition (Paragraph [0207-0208] specifies the "ink-set" being comprised of two or more different colored inks),
wherein: the aqueous yellow ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PY17, PY83, PY128, PY155, and PY180 (Paragraph [0027] describes possible examples of yellow pigments including “Pigment Yellow 155”. Paragraphs [0014] and [0208] describe the ink being aqueous.);
the aqueous magenta ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PR146, PR150, PR176, PR185, and PR254 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including magenta. Paragraph [0209] describes the pigment in the red ink is PR254.)
the aqueous cyan ink composition contains PB15:3 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including cyan. Paragraph [0208] describes possible examples of the pigments including "Pigment Blue 15:3" for the cyan ink.)
the aqueous black ink composition contains PBk7 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including black. Paragraph [0027] describes possible examples of pigments including "Carbon Black" which is another term known for a black ink composition PBk7, para. [0208]);
the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors contains an aqueous medium (Paragraph [0031 and 0095] describes how the pigment particles are crosslinked with a crosslinking agent in an "aqueous medium".).
Wilson fails to teach the aqueous violet ink composition contains PV23.
However, Hattori teaches the aqueous violet ink composition contains PV23 (The second paragraph on page 7 describes a water-based ink. While the second to last paragraph of page 7 describes the possible pigments that can be used including “C.I.I. Pigment Violet” “23”.)
Wilson and Hattori are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions taught by Wilson to also apply the aqueous violet ink composition contains PV23 taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of improving the color reproducibility by adding colors such as orange, green, and violet (Page 17, second paragraph from the top.)
Modified Wilson fails to teach wherein the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors contains an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder resin.
However, Yoichi teaches the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors containing an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder resin (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the inkjet ink composition comprises a colorant, an aqueous medium, and an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin. Paragraph 2 of page 3 also describes the benefits of using a polyurethane resin gained from a specific reaction component as a binder resin in an inkjet ink composition.)
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin to each composition as a binder resin taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of better storage ability and ejection stability as taught by Yoichi at page 3, paragraph 2 and better applicability or print quality to various base films, as taught by Yoichi at page 5, second to last paragraph labeled "(Alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin)").
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 .
Wilson fails to teach wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is a reaction product of a diisocyanate, a polymer dial compound, and an acid group containing dial compound.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is a reaction product of a diisocyanate, a polymer dial compound, and an acid group-containing dial compound (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the "water-based inkjet ink composition" includes an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin that fallows "condition 1 ". The paragraph further discloses the "condition 1" as" ... A reaction product of reaction components containing hexamethylene diisocyanate, at least one selected from the group of polyester dial compounds represented by general formula 1, and an acid group-containing dial compound ... ".).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin that is a reaction product of a diisocyanate, a polymer dial compound, and an acid group-containing dial compound as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of having an aqueous resin varnish that can dissolve or disperse in an aqueous medium (Page 5, paragraph 1 ).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claim 1.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin comprising a hydrazine residue.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin comprising a hydrazine residue (Page 6, paragraphs 3 and 4 describe the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin comprises a "reaction component". The paragraphs further explain how a "chain extender'' or a "reaction terminator" could be used as the "reaction component" and give several examples that include hydrazine, alkyldihydrazine, and other hydrazine residues.).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin comprising a hydrazine residue as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of getting the desired reactions between the hexamethylene diisocyanate, the polyester dial compound, the acid group-containing diol compound, and the hydrazine residue. (Page 6, paragraph 6)
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claim 2.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the polymer dial compound is polypropylene glycol and/or a polyester dial compound.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the polymer dial compound is polypropylene glycol and/or a polyester dial compound (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the "water-based inkjet ink composition" includes an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin that fallows "condition 1 ". The paragraph further discloses the "condition 1" as" ... A reaction product of reaction components containing hexamethylene diisocyanate, at least one selected from the group of polyester dial compounds represented by general formula 1, and an acid group-containing dial compound ... ".).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the polymer dial compound to be polypropylene glycol and/or a polyester dial compound as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of getting the desired reactions between the hexamethylene diisocyanate, the polyester dial compound, the acid group-containing dial compound, and the hydrazine residue. (Page 6, paragraph 6)
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claim 3.
Wilson fails to teach wherein a proportion of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue is 0.3 to 4.0% by mass in each of the aqueous inkjet ink com positions.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein a proportion of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue is 0.3 to 4.0% by mass in each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions (Page 7, paragraph 3 describes the preferred content amount of alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is 1.0 to 10.0% and more preferably 3 to 8% by mass based on the total mass of the aqueous inkjet ink composition for lamination by mass based on the total mass of the ink composition for use, which overlaps the range given in the claimed invention.)
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the proportion of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue to be 0.3 to 4.0% by mass in each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of the storage stability and the ejection stability of the aqueous ink composition for aqueous inkjet for lamination (Page 7, paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claim 3.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue has an acid value of 15 to 35 mg KOH/g.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue has an acid value of 15 to 35 mg KOH/g (The last paragraph of page 6 and the first paragraph of page 7 describe the acid value of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin to be from 5 to 100 mgKOH / g, which engulfs the given range of the claimed invention.)
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the acid value of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue to be from 15 to 35 mg KOH/gas taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of maintaining the dispersibility in an aqueous medium, the drying property at the time of printing, and the water resistance of the obtained printed matter. (The last paragraph of page 6 and the first paragraph of page 7).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 .
Wilson fails to teach wherein each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions is an aqueous inkjet ink composition for lamination.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions is an aqueous inkjet ink composition for lamination (Page 3, paragraph 1 describes the aqueous inkjet ink composition is for lamination.).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the object of the aqueous inkjet ink com position as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of reducing residual solvents, improving the printing work environment, prevent air pollution, and preventing fire accidents as the printing is water-based (Yoichi, Page 3, paragraph 1 ).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the aqueous inkjet ink com positions in the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 .
Wilson fails to teach a laminate film wherein a printed layer formed of each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions in the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 and a sealant film are provided on a base film.
However, Yoichi teaches a laminate film wherein a printed layer formed of each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions in the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 (Page 3, the last paragraph describes a printing layer of aqueous inkjet ink com positions for lamination) and a sealant film (Page 3, the last paragraph describes the sealant film) are provided on a base film (Page 3, the last paragraph describes a base film.).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply a laminated film, a sealant film, and a base film as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of improving the lamination strength and seal strength (Page 3 paragraph 4).
Regarding Claim 9, Wilson teaches an inkjet ink set (Paragraph [0207] describes an inkjet ink set) comprising:
aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors, the aqueous inkjet ink compositions including an aqueous yellow ink composition, an aqueous magenta ink composition, an aqueous cyan ink composition, and an aqueous black ink composition, (Paragraph [0207-0208] specifies the "ink-set" being comprised of two or more different colored inks), the aqueous inkjet ink compositions including
the aqueous magenta ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PR146, PR150, PR176, PR185, and PR254 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including magenta. Paragraph [0209] describes the pigment in the red ink is PR254.)
the aqueous cyan ink composition contains PB15:3 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including cyan. Paragraph [0208] describes possible examples of the pigments including "Pigment Blue 15:3" for the cyan ink.)
the aqueous black ink composition contains PBk7 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including black. Paragraph [0027] describes possible examples of pigments including "Carbon Black" which is another term known for a black ink composition PBk7, para. [0208]);
the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors contains an aqueous medium (Paragraph [0031 and 0095] describes how the pigment particles are crosslinked with a crosslinking agent in an "aqueous medium".).
Wilson fails to teach the aqueous yellow ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PY17, PY83, PY128, and PY180.
However, Hattori teaches the aqueous yellow ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PY17, PY83, PY128, and PY180 (The second paragraph on page 7 describes a water-based ink. While the last paragraph of page 7 describes the possible yellow pigments that can be used including “C.I.I. Pigment Yellow” “17”, “83”, “128”, and “180”.)
Wilson and Hattori are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions taught by Wilson to also the aqueous yellow ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PY17, PY83, PY128, and PY180 taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of having the ability to obtain a “full-color image” (Page 17, second paragraph from the top.)
Modified Wilson fails to teach wherein the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors contains an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder resin.
However, Yoichi teaches the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors containing an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder resin (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the inkjet ink composition comprises a colorant, an aqueous medium, and an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin. Paragraph 2 of page 3 also describes the benefits of using a polyurethane resin gained from a specific reaction component as a binder resin in an inkjet ink composition.)
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin to each composition as a binder resin taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of better storage ability and ejection stability as taught by Yoichi at page 3, paragraph 2 and better applicability or print quality to various base films, as taught by Yoichi at page 5, second to last paragraph labeled "(Alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin)").
Regarding Claim 17, Wilson teaches an inkjet ink set (Paragraph [0207] describes an inkjet ink set) comprising:
aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors (Paragraph [0207-0208] specifies the "ink-set" being comprised of two or more different colored inks), the aqueous inkjet ink compositions including
the aqueous yellow ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PY17, PY83, PY128, PY155, and PY180 (Paragraph [0027] describes possible examples of yellow pigments including "Pigment Yellow 155". Paragraph [0014, 0208] describes the ink being aqueous.)
the aqueous cyan ink composition contains PB15:3 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including cyan. Paragraph [0208] describes possible examples of the pigments including "Pigment Blue 15:3" for the cyan ink.)
the aqueous black ink composition contains PBk7 (Paragraph [0026] describes preferred pigments including black. Paragraph [0027] describes possible examples of pigments including "Carbon Black" which is another term known for a black ink composition PBk7, para. [0208]);
the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors contains an aqueous medium (Paragraph [0031 and 0095] describes how the pigment particles are crosslinked with a crosslinking agent in an "aqueous medium".).
Wilson fails to teach the aqueous magenta ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PR146, PR150, PR176, and PR185.
However, Hattori teaches the aqueous magenta ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PR146, PR150, PR176, and PR185 (The second paragraph on page 7 describes a water-based ink. While the second to last paragraph of page 7 describes the possible magenta pigments that can be used including “C.I.I. Pigment Red” “146”, “150”, and “185”.)
Wilson and Hattori are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions taught by Wilson to also apply the aqueous magenta ink composition contains at least one type of pigment selected from the group consisting of PR146, PR150, PR176, and PR185 as taught by Hattori. This would have been done for the purpose of having the ability to obtain a “full-color image” (Page 17, second paragraph from the top.).
Modified Wilson fails to teach wherein the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors contains an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder resin.
However, Yoichi teaches the aqueous inkjet ink compositions of four colors containing an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin as a binder resin (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the inkjet ink composition comprises a colorant, an aqueous medium, and an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin. Paragraph 2 of page 3 also describes the benefits of using a polyurethane resin gained from a specific reaction component as a binder resin in an inkjet ink composition.
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin to each composition as a binder resin taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of better storage ability and ejection stability as taught by Yoichi at page 3, paragraph 2 and better applicability or print quality to various base films, as taught by Yoichi at page 5, second to last paragraph labeled "(Alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin)").
Regarding claims 10 and 18, the combination of Wilson, Hattori, and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claims 9 and 17 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is a reaction product of a diisocyanate, a polymer dial compound, and an acid group containing dial compound.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is a reaction product of a diisocyanate, a polymer dial compound, and an acid group-containing dial compound (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the "water-based inkjet ink composition" includes an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin that fallows "condition 1 ". The paragraph further discloses the "condition 1" as" ... A reaction product of reaction components containing hexamethylene diisocyanate, at least one selected from the group of polyester dial compounds represented by general formula 1, and an acid group-containing dial compound ... ".).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin that is a reaction product of a diisocyanate, a polymer dial compound, and an acid group-containing dial compound as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of having an aqueous resin varnish that can dissolve or disperse in an aqueous medium (Page 5, paragraph 1 ).
Regarding claims 11 and 20, the combination of Wilson, Hattori, and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claims 9 and 17 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the alkali-soluble or self- emulsifying polyurethane resin is an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue (Page 6, paragraphs 3 and 4 describe the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin comprises a "reaction component". The paragraphs further explain how a "chain extender'' or a "reaction terminator" could be used as the "reaction component" and give several examples that include hydrazine, alkyldihydrazine, and other hydrazine residues.).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin comprising a hydrazine residue as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of getting the desired reactions between the hexamethylene diisocyanate, the polyester dial compound, the acid group-containing diol compound, and the hydrazine residue. (Page 6, paragraph 6)
Regarding claims 12 and 19, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claims 10 and 18 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the polymer dial compound is polypropylene glycol and/or a polyester dial compound.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the polymer dial compound is polypropylene glycol and/or a polyester dial compound (Page 3, the last paragraph describes how the "water-based inkjet ink composition" includes an alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin that fallows "condition 1 ". The paragraph further discloses the "condition 1" as" ... A reaction product of reaction components containing hexamethylene diisocyanate, at least one selected from the group of polyester dial compounds represented by general formula 1, and an acid group-containing dial compound ... ".).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the polymer dial compound to be polypropylene glycol and/or a polyester dial compound as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of getting the desired reactions between the hexamethylene diisocyanate, the polyester dial compound, the acid group-containing dial compound, and the hydrazine residue. (Page 6, paragraph 6)
Regarding claims 13 and 21, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claims 11 and 20 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach wherein a proportion of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue in a molecule is 0.3 to 4.0% by mass in each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein a proportion of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue in a molecule is 0.3 to 4.0% by mass in each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions (Page 7, paragraph 3 describes the preferred content amount of alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin is 1.0 to 10.0% and more preferably 3 to 8% by mass based on the total mass of the aqueous inkjet ink composition for lamination by mass based on the total mass of the ink composition for use, which overlaps the range given in the claimed invention.)
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the proportion of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue to be 0.3 to 4.0% by mass in each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of the storage stability and the ejection stability of the aqueous ink composition for aqueous inkjet for lamination (Page 7, paragraph 3).
Regarding claims 14 and 22, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claims 11 and 20 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue in a molecule has an acid value of 15 to 35 mg KOH/g.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue in a molecule has an acid value of 15 to 35 mg KOH/g (The last paragraph of page 6 and the first paragraph of page 7 describe the acid value of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying aqueous polyurethane resin to be from 5 to 100 mgKOH / g, which engulfs the given range of the claimed invention.)
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the acid value of the alkali-soluble or self-emulsifying polyurethane resin having a hydrazine residue to be from 15 to 35 mg KOH/gas taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of maintaining the dispersibility in an aqueous medium, the drying property at the time of printing, and the water resistance of the obtained printed matter. (The last paragraph of page 6 and the first paragraph of page 7).
Regarding claims 15 and 23, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the inkjet ink set according to claims 9 and 17 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach wherein each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions is an aqueous inkjet ink composition for lamination.
However, Yoichi teaches wherein each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions is an aqueous inkjet ink composition for lamination (Page 3, paragraph 1 describes the aqueous inkjet ink composition is for lamination.).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply the object of the aqueous inkjet ink com position as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of reducing residual solvents, improving the printing work environment, prevent air pollution, and preventing fire accidents as the printing is water-based (Yoichi, Page 3, paragraph 1 ).
Regarding claims 16 and 24, the combination of Wilson and Yoichi teaches the aqueous inkjet ink com positions in the inkjet ink set according to claims 9 and 17 respectively.
Wilson fails to teach a laminate film wherein a printed layer formed of each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions in the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 and a sealant film are provided on a base film.
However, Yoichi teaches a laminate film wherein a printed layer formed of each of the aqueous inkjet ink compositions in the inkjet ink set according to claim 1 (Page 3, the last paragraph describes a printing layer of aqueous inkjet ink com positions for lamination) and a sealant film (Page 3, the last paragraph describes the sealant film) are provided on a base film (Page 3, the last paragraph describes a base film.).
Wilson and Yoichi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an inkjet ink composition for lamination. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the aqueous inkjet ink compositions as taught by Wilson to also apply a laminated film, a sealant film, and a base film as taught by Yoichi. This would have been done for the purpose of improving the lamination strength and seal strength (Page 3 paragraph 4).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NATASHA DEPHENIA QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-6375. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30 - 4:00 CT.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/N.D.Q./Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853