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 Application
Claims 1-7 are pending and presented for examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 11/20/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
1. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “weak” in claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “weak” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes, any alkaline developer will be interpreted to read on a “weak alkaline developer”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
2. Claim(s) 1-3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Karasawa et al. (EP 0633296).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 6, Karasawa teaches a method comprising: conducting a coating process by applying a coating layer on a stepped surface of a workpiece
PNG
media_image1.png
178
806
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Figure 1, the black pattern is the stepped surface with a lower region, an upper region and a middle region) having a red first color (0035-0036 and Figure 1); then forming an ink layer that has a green color, potentially by vacuum deposition (0037, and note that this is a type of physical vapor deposition), that covers the upper, middle and lower regions; soft baking the ink layer (0035-0036 and Figure 1); exposing the ink layer to light to crosslink a first area of the ink layer corresponding to a lower and middle region of the stepped surface (0035-0036 and Figure 1); then developing the ink layer, with an alkaline developer (0030) wherein the ink layer on the upper surface is not crosslinked to expose the red color on the coating layer formed on the upper surface (0035-0036 and Figure 1); and then hard baking (0035) the ink layer to provide the stepped surface which has the green color on the lower region and middle shoulder region and a red color formed on an upper region
PNG
media_image2.png
196
471
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Figure 1, note that the green color, element 6 is on the lower region and middle region and has been removed from the upper region exposing the red color, element 5 on the upper surface). Karasawa teaches that the workpiece can be a plastic (0038). Karasawa teaches all the critical limitations of claims 1-3 and 6; therefore, Karasawa anticipates the claims.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
3. Claim(s) 4, 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karasawa.
I. Regarding claim 4, Karasawa teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach a thickness of 5-8 microns. However, Karasawa teaches that the thickness of the ink layers can be 0.5-100 microns (0035) which overlaps with the claimed range. Furthermore, overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness.
II. Regarding claim 5, Karasawa teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach the soft baking done at a temperature of 90-120 ºC for a range of 5-15 minutes. However, Karasawa teaches soft baking at 85-100 ºC for 2-5 minutes which overlaps with the claimed ranges (0081). Furthermore, overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness.
III. Regarding claim 7, Karasawa teaches all the limitations of claim 1 including a post-bake step under suitable conditions (0035), but fails to explicitly teach the ink layer hard baked at 140-160 ºC for no shorter than one hour. However, adjusting the baking temperature will adjust the time necessary for baking as well as the final curing of the ink layer. Furthermore, the baking time and temperature will necessarily need to be adjusted based on the particular dye and ink layer that is applied. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Claims 1-7 are pending.
Claims 1-7 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S WALTERS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ROBERT S WALTERS JR/
January 16, 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717