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 .
STATUS OF CLAIMS
Claims 1-15 are pending in the application, claims 14 and 15 are withdrawn from consideration.
Election/Restrictions
Applicants' election without traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 5 February 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 14 and 15 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5 February 2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in this application on 4 March 2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 2018/0168351 A1) in view of Boniface (US 2018/0056671 A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Cho discloses a home appliance (e.g., refrigerator (ref. #100), oven (ref. #200), and/or dishwasher (ref. #300)) including a main body (ref. #110, #210, or #310) provided to form an exterior of the home appliance, and a panel (ref. #1) for the home appliance configured to form at least one surface of outer surfaces of the main body or doors of the home appliance, wherein the panel for the home appliance includes a base material layer (ref. #10) formed of a metal material, a pattern layer (ref. #20) formed on the base material layer, a color layer (ref. #30) disposed on the pattern layer to develop a color, a coupling layer (ref. #40) applied on the pattern layer to couple the base material layer and the color layer, and a protective layer (ref. #50) disposed on the color layer (figures 1 to 6C, [0002]-[0004], [0011]-[0014], [0023], [0028], [0043]-[0051], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0074] of Cho). Cho also discloses that the home appliance (e.g., refrigerator (ref. #100), oven (ref. #200), and/or dishwasher (ref. #300)) may include a cabinet (ref. #111, #211, or #311) having storage compartments (not shown), and doors (ref. #112, #212, or #312) rotatably installed at the cabinet to open and close the storage compartments and configured to form the exterior together with the cabinet, wherein the door can form a front exterior of the home appliance (figures 1 to 3 and [0044]-[0046] of Cho). Specifically, Cho provides for --a home appliance, comprising: a main body having an opening; a door configured to open and close the opening; and a color panel on at least one of the main body or the door, the color panel including: a base panel including: a front surface, and an uneven pattern portion on the front surface, having upper sides, and lower sides that are at a height difference from the upper sides, and a color layer on the uneven pattern portion--.
Cho fails to disclose --a color layer including: main ink dots having a main ink dot size, and sub ink dots having a sub ink dot size that is smaller than the main ink dot size, wherein at least one sub ink dot of the sub ink dots is between each two adjacent main ink dots of the main ink dots, and at least some of the sub ink dots are on at least one of a periphery of the upper sides or a periphery of the lower sides--.
Boniface discloses a surface coating, the coating comprising at least two superposed layers (ref. #6 and #6'), the layers comprising a plurality of droplets (ref. #4, #4', and #5) arranged in each layer according to a predetermined pattern (ref. #7 and #7'), wherein the coating can be formed in reliefs on an apparent face (ref. #1') of a body (ref. #1), and wherein the first layer is a colored layer (ref. #6) (figures 1A to 2D, [0021] [0024]-[0027], [0034]-[0037], and [0043] of Boniface). Boniface also discloses that it is possible to deposit droplets (ref. #4) of small size in an aligned manner along the outer lateral edges of each new layer (ref. #6) of coloring substance, the droplets thus forming a peripheral frame for positioning and holding larger droplets (ref. #4'), and that it is possible to deposit droplets (ref. #4) of small size in rows between adjacent rows of larger droplets (ref. #4') (figures 3A to 4C, [0028], [029], [0065], and [0067] of Boniface). (In the instant case, the first layer (ref. #6) is a colored layer and considered equivalent to the claimed colored layer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have combined the coating of Boniface with the home appliance of Cho in order to have --a color layer including: main ink dots having a main ink dot size, and sub ink dots having a sub ink dot size that is smaller than the main ink dot size, wherein at least one sub ink dot of the sub ink dots is between each two adjacent main ink dots of the main ink dots, and at least some of the sub ink dots are on at least one of a periphery of the upper sides or a periphery of the lower sides--. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have combined the coating of Boniface with the home appliance of Cho, from the stand-point of having a coating or surface decoration capable of providing visual effects, tactile effects, and a high resistance to scratching and abrasion by friction and tearing ([0018] of Boniface). (In the instant case, the at least two layers of superposed coating layers of Boniface would be disposed at least within the recesses of the pattern of Cho.)
Regarding Claim 2: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the uneven pattern portion includes an embossed pattern forming at least some of the upper sides and at least some of the lower sides, at least some of the sub ink dots are on a periphery of the upper sides formed by the embossed pattern, and at least some of the sub ink dots are on a periphery of the lower sides formed by the embossed pattern (figure 4 and [0050] of Cho; figures 1A to 5I, [0024]-[0029], [0065], and [0066] of Boniface). (In the instant case, the pattern of Boniface can be used to form the pattern of Cho with upper sides and lower sides having peripheries thereof having some of the sub ink dots.)
(Claim 2 recites the limitation --an embossed pattern forming at least some of the upper sides and at least some of the lower sides-- in lines 2 to 3, which is considered by the examiner to be a "product-by-process" limitation. MPEP §2113(I) states, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). In the instant case, only the structure implied by the process steps (i.e., an uneven pattern portion comprising upper sides and lower sides) have been given weight.)
Regarding Claim 3: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the home appliance further includes lateral sides between the upper sides and the lower sides, wherein at least some of the lateral sides connect the upper sides formed by the embossed pattern and the lower sides formed by the embossed pattern, and some of the sub ink dots are on the lateral sides connected by the embossed pattern (figure 1A of Boniface).
Regarding Claim 4: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the uneven pattern portion includes an engraved pattern forming at least some of the upper sides and at least some of the lower sides, at least some of the sub ink dots are on a periphery of the upper sides formed by the embossed pattern, and at least some of the sub ink dots are on a periphery of the lower sides formed by the embossed pattern (figure 4 and [0050] of Cho; figures 1A to 5I, [0024]-[0029], [0065], and [0066] of Boniface). (In the instant case, the pattern of Boniface can be used to form the pattern of Cho with upper sides and lower sides having peripheries thereof having some of the sub ink dots.)
(Claim 4 recites the limitation --an engraved pattern forming at least some of the upper sides and at least some of the lower sides-- in lines 2 to 3, which is considered by the examiner to be a "product-by-process" limitation. MPEP §2113(I) states, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). In the instant case, only the structure implied by the process steps (i.e., an uneven pattern portion comprising upper sides and lower sides) have been given weight.)
Regarding Claim 5: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the home appliance further includes lateral sides between the upper sides and the lower sides, wherein at least some of the lateral sides connect the upper sides formed by the engraved pattern and the lower sides formed by the engraved pattern, and some of the sub ink dots are on the lateral sides connected by the engraved pattern (figure 1A of Boniface).
Regarding Claim 7: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the main ink dots and the sub ink dots include a material that is curable by ultraviolet light ([0067] of Boniface).
Regarding Claim 8: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the color panel further includes a transparent layer at least partially covering the color layer (figure 1A and [0043] of Boniface).
Regarding Claim 9: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that a shape of the transparent layer corresponds to a shape of the uneven pattern portion (figure 4 of Cho).
Regarding Claim 11: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the base panel further includes a coating layer (ref. #40; "coupling layer") on the front surface, and the color layer is on the coating layer (figure 4 and [0060] of Cho).
Regarding Claim 12: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that the coating layer has a white color ([0052] of Boniface).
Regarding Claim 13: Cho in view of Boniface discloses that a shape of the coating layer corresponds to a shape of the uneven pattern portion (figure 4 of Cho).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 2018/0168351 A1) in view of Boniface (US 2018/0056671 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schum et al. (US 2015/0367543 A1).
Cho in view of Boniface is relied upon as stated above.
Regarding Claim 6: Cho in view of Boniface failed to disclose --the height difference is 30 micrometers or more--.
Schum discloses three-dimensional patterns in a plastic molding, wherein the surface has protuberances and/or depressions which can have a height/depth from about 10 µm to a few centimeters ([0014]-[0015] of Kim); which overlaps the presently claimed range of --30 micrometers or more--. Schum differs from the claims by failing to disclose an anticipatory example or a range that is sufficiently specific to anticipate the claimed range. However, it has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Schum, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness. See MPEP §2144.05. Schum further discloses that the patterned sheet can be combined with pigmentation and additional printing or coating processes ([0030] of Schum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have incorporated the three-dimensional pattern of Schum with the home appliance disclosed by Cho in view of Boniface in order to have --the height difference be 30 micrometers or more--. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have incorporated the three-dimensional pattern of Schum with the home appliance disclosed by Cho in view of Boniface, from the stand-point of achieving particular optical effects, functional coatings, and/or decorative coatings ([0002] of Schum).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 2018/0168351 A1) in view of Boniface (US 2018/0056671 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2008/0053334 A1).
Cho in view of Boniface is relied upon as stated above.
Regarding Claim 10: Cho in view of Boniface discloses a transparent layer, but fails to disclose --the transparent layer includes a transparent ink--.
Kim discloses printing a transparent ink on a surface of an object on which a color paint is printed ([0014]-[0015] of Kim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have incorporated the transparent ink of Kim with the transparent layer of the home appliance disclosed by Cho in view of Boniface in order to have --the transparent layer include a transparent ink--. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have incorporated the transparent ink with the transparent layer of the home appliance disclosed by Cho in view of Boniface, from the stand-point of having a surface of an object representing different textures and different external glosses without changing the color of the object ([0013] of Kim).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Donald M. Flores, Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 270-1466. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 to 17:00 M-F; Alternate Fridays off.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. 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.
/DONALD M FLORES JR/
Donald M. Flores, Jr.Examiner, Art Unit 1781