DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 2, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment filed on June 2, 2026 (and highlighted in Applicant’s arguments filed on June 2, 2026), with respect to an objection to the specification in ¶0006 (as stated in Final Rejection filed March 22, 2024) has been fully considered and resolves the objection. Therefore, this objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments filed on June 2, 2026, with respect to Claim 1 have been 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 challenged in the argument. Claims 2-11 depend from claim 1 and therefore applicant’s arguments regarding these claims are also moot.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4 & 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamai et al. (US 20190283479 A1; herein referred to as “Tamai”) in view of Sakurada (US 20150009268 A1) and further in view of Fukuda (US 20110102496 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Tamai teaches an aqueous ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) comprising:
a self-dispersing pigment (i.e., “self-dispersible pigment”; Tamai: ¶0088-0090);
a water-soluble resin (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin”; Tamai: ¶0063-0070); and
a betaine (i.e., an “amphoteric surfactant” such as “lauryl dimethyl betaine, stearyl dimethyl betaine, and lauryl dihydroxyethyl betaine”; Tamai: ¶0123-0124 & 0130),
the self-dispersing pigment is dispersed in an aqueous medium of the aqueous ink jet ink composition without a dispersant (i.e., “self-dispersible pigment” introduces a hydrophilic functional group into the pigment to disperse the pigment in water; Tamai: ¶0088-0090).
the water-soluble resin is not a resin for dispersing a pigment and is dissolved in the aqueous medium without adhering to the self-dispersing pigment (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin”, which is used to improve “abrasion resistance”; Tamai: ¶0070 & ¶0064).
the water-soluble resin is obtained by polymerizing an acrylic monomer and at least one of maleic acid or a maleic acid derivative, or a styrene-acrylic resin (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin”; Tamai: ¶0063-0070),
the content of the water-soluble resin is 1.8 % by mass or less with respect to a total mass of the ink composition (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin” at 1.0-10.0% by total mass of the ink; Tamai: ¶0070). Tamai teaches a compositional range with overlaps with the claimed compositional range (see MPEP 2131.03).
the content of the self-dispersing pigment is 3.5% by mass or greater and 8.5% by mass or less with respect to the total mass of the ink composition (i.e., “self-dispersible pigment” at 1-20% by total mass of the ink; Tamai: ¶0087-0090). Tamai teaches a compositional range with overlaps with the claimed compositional range (see MPEP 2131.03).
a mass ratio (self-dispersing pigment/water-soluble resin) of the self-dispersing pigment to the water-soluble resin is 2.8 or greater and less than 30 (i.e., “self-dispersible pigment” at 1-20% by total mass of the ink & “styrene-acrylic resin” at 1.0-10.0% by total mass of the ink; Tamai: ¶0087-0090 & ¶0070). For example, 5% self-dispersible pigment divided by 1.0% water-soluble resin equals a mass ratio of 5, which falls within the claimed range.
the content of the betaine is 2.5% by mass or greater and 9.5% by mass or less with respect to the total mass of the ink composition. (i.e., “surfactant”, such as “lauryl dimethyl betaine, stearyl dimethyl betaine, and lauryl dihydroxyethyl betaine”, at 0.001-5% by total mass of the ink; Tamai: ¶0148, ¶0123-0124, & ¶0130). Tamai teaches a compositional range with overlaps with the claimed compositional range (see MPEP 2131.03).
Tamai is silent on
wherein the self-dispersing pigment is obtained by introducing a phosphorus- containing group to the pigment,
the water-soluble resin has an acid value of 350 mg KOH/g or greater and 600 mg KOH/g or less
Fukuda teaches wherein the self-dispersing pigment is obtained by introducing a phosphorus- containing group to the pigment (i.e., “a self-dispersible pigment…which is dispersible in an aqueous medium in the absence of a surfactant or a resin because of one or more kinds of hydrophilic functional groups…bonded to the surface thereof directly or via an atom group”, such as a “phosphonic acid group”; Fukuda: ¶0020, ¶0062, & ¶0064).
Sakurada teaches the water-soluble resin has an acid value of 350 mg KOH/g or greater and 600 mg KOH/g or less (i.e., “water-soluble resin” with an acid value between 50 mg KOH/g - 550 mg KOH/g; Sakurada: ¶0039-0042). Sakurada teaches a compositional range with overlaps with the claimed compositional range (see MPEP 2131.03). Note that Sakurada teaches a resin copolymer which can contain styrene and acrylic acid (aka a styrene-acrylic resin; Sakurada: ¶0042) which is a resin, as taught previously by Tamai, that can be used for purposes other than dispersing a pigment, such as improving “abrasion resistance” (Tamai: ¶0070 & ¶0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the self-dispersing pigment taught by Tamai (Tamai: ¶0088-0090) by selecting a phosphorous-containing group to enable the pigment to be self-dispersing, because phosphonic acid (i.e., a phosphorous-containing group) “has a high hydrophilic nature enough to stably disperse the pigment particles in an aqueous medium” (Fukuda: ¶0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the water-soluble resin taught by Tamai (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin” used to ensure “fixability and enhancing image quality”; Tamai: ¶0070) to have an acid value in the claimed range, given Sakurada teaches a water-soluble resin “favorably” has acid values overlapping the claimed range (i.e., “water-soluble resin” with an acid value between 50 mg KOH/g - 550 mg KOH/g; Sakurada: ¶0039-0042).
With respect to Claim 2, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1.
Tamai is silent on, wherein the phosphorus-containing group is a phosphonic acid group.
Fukuda teaches wherein the phosphorus-containing group is a phosphonic acid group (i.e., “a self-dispersible pigment…which is dispersible in an aqueous medium in the absence of a surfactant or a resin because of one or more kinds of hydrophilic functional groups…bonded to the surface thereof directly or via an atom group”, such as a “phosphonic acid group”; Fukuda: ¶0020, ¶0062, & ¶0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the self-dispersing pigment taught by Tamai (Tamai: ¶0088-0090) by selecting a phosphorous-containing group to enable the pigment to be self-dispersing, because phosphonic acid (i.e., a phosphorous-containing group) “has a high hydrophilic nature enough to stably disperse the pigment particles in an aqueous medium” (Fukuda: ¶0064).
With respect to Claim 3, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1, wherein the content of the water-soluble resin is 0.3% by mass or greater and 1.8% by mass or less with respect to the total mass of the ink composition (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin” at 1.0-10.0% by total mass of the ink; Tamai: ¶0070). Tamai teaches a compositional range with overlaps with the claimed compositional range (see MPEP 2131.03).
With respect to Claim 4, Tamai modified by Sakurada, further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1, wherein the content of a resin particle is less than 0.1% by mass with respect to the total mass of the ink composition (Tamai: ¶0073). Tamai teaches the composition “can” include other resins, such as “resin particles”, which implies that the composition does not require the use of resin particles (i.e., “resin particles” can be 0% by mass with respect to the total ink; Tamai: ¶0073).
With respect to Claim 8, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1, wherein the ink composition is used for performing recording on an absorbing recording medium (i.e., ink is formulated so as to enhance the permeability of the ink into the “recording medium”; Tamai: ¶0116).
With respect to Claim 9, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1, further comprising: polyols having a standard boiling point of higher than 280C (i.e., “glycerin”; Tamai: ¶0104). Applicant notes in ¶0099 of their disclosure that glycerin is an example of a polyol having a standard boiling point of higher than 280C.
With respect to Claim 10, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches a recording method performed by using an ink jet recording device that includes an ink jet head (i.e., “recording device and recording method” using a “recording device” and a “head portion to discharge the ink”; Tamai: ¶0185-0189), the method comprising:
jetting an ink jet ink composition from the ink jet head to make the ink jet ink composition adhere to a recording medium (Tamai: ¶0185-0189), wherein
the ink jet ink composition is the ink jet ink composition according to claim 1 (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090).
With respect to Claim 11, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the recording method (i.e., “recording method”; Tamai: ¶0185-0189) according to claim 10.
Tamai is silent on wherein a recording speed is 20 sheets/min or greater.
Fukuda teaches that an aqueous ink for inkjet printing can be “suitable for high-speed printers, for example a printer capable of printing at printing speeds of 3-150 pages/min” (Fukuda: ¶0185).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the recording method to operating the ink jet recording device at high speed, such as 20 sheets/min or greater (Fukuda: ¶0185), because this increases production. Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the recording speed of the recording method, because it has been held that where general conditions of a claim are disclosed in prior art (i.e., recording on a sheet) discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (in re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamai in view of Sakurada, further in view of Fukuda, and further in view of Urano et al. (US 20200276850 A1; herein referred to as “Urano”).
With respect to Claim 5, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1.
Tamai is silent on wherein the water-soluble resin is a resin obtained by polymerizing an acrylic monomer and at least one of maleic acid or a maleic acid derivative.
Urano teaches wherein the water-soluble resin is a resin obtained by polymerizing an acrylic monomer and at least one of maleic acid or a maleic acid derivative (i.e., “water-soluble resin”, such as “acrylic acid/maleic acid copolymers”; Urano: ¶0182).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the water-soluble resin taught by Tamai (i.e., “styrene-acrylic resin”; Tamai: ¶0063-0070) by replacing it with the acrylic acid/maleic acid copolymer taught by Urano (i.e., “water-soluble resin”, such as “acrylic acid/maleic acid copolymers”; Urano: ¶0182), because Urano teaches that this resin can be included in the aqueous ink so that “colorant can be satisfactorily fixed to the substrate, and therefore superior coloration can be achieved with a small amount of the colorant” (Urano: ¶0181-0182).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamai in view of Sakurada, further in view of Fukuda, and further in view of Ito (US 20180273780 A1).
With respect to Claim 7, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1.
Tamai is silent on wherein the betaine is selected from trialkylglycine.
Ito teaches wherein the betaine is selected from trialkylglycine (i.e., “betaines of trimethylglycine; Ito: ¶0063). As noted in the applicant’s disclosure in ¶0087, trimethylglycine is an example of a trialkylglycine.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the “surfactant” taught by Tamai, such as “lauryl dimethyl betaine, stearyl dimethyl betaine, and lauryl dihydroxyethyl betaine” (Tamai: ¶0123-0124, 0130, & 0148) by instead selecting by the betaine trimethylglycine, because betaines of trimethylglycine are “particularly preferably used” wetting agents (aka a type of surfactant; Ito: ¶0063).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following are statements of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for each claim:
With respect to Claim 6, Tamai modified by Sakurada, and further modified by Fukuda, teaches the ink jet ink composition (i.e., an “ink” with a pigment that can disperse in water; Tamai: ¶0006 & ¶0088-0090) according to claim 1.
However, Tamai in combination with the other prior art of record does not reasonably teach or suggest the feature of the ink jet ink composition, wherein a proportion of a water-soluble monomer in the water-soluble resin is 30% by mass or greater and 60% by mass or less when an amount of all monomers in the water-soluble resin is set to 100% by mass.
It is these limitations, expressed in the claimed combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHLOMIT CHELST whose telephone number is (571)272-0832. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 8:30 am to 5:00 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, Ricardo Magallanes, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-5960. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/SHLOMIT CHELST/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/ Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights