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) 1-8, 11-16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizu et al. (WO2021/256341A1) in view of Lin (US 3491111). Citations to Aizu et al. will be made to the US-equivalent, US 2023/0120465. Regarding claim 1, Aizu et al. disclose “an on-press development type lithographic printing plate precursor (title) comprising: a support (abstract); and an image-recording layer on the support (abstract), wherein the image-recording layer comprises an infrared absorber (paragraph 30), a polymerization initiator (paragraph 19), a polymerizable compound (paragraph 47), and one or more” color developing compounds (paragraphs 393 and 439). Aizu et al. fail to disclose that the color developing compounds are “selected from the group consisting of a compound represented by Formula (1) and a compound represented by Formula (2):
PNG
media_image1.png
259
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formulae (1) and (2), Ra1 and Ra2 each independently represent a hydrogen atom or a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group; Ra1 and Ra2 may be linked to each other to form a ring structure; Rb1 and Rb3 each independently represent a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group; Rb2 and Rb4 each independently represent a hydrogen atom or a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group; and EDG’s each independently represent a hydrogen atom or an electron-donating group, provided that at least one of the four EDG’s in Formula (1) represents an electron-donating group,” but do disclose that the color developing agent is preferably an acid color developing agent that is a leuco colorant (paragraph 398), but that the leuco colorant is not particularly limited so long as it has a leuco structure (paragraph 399).
Lin discloses a compound which changes color upon contact with an acid (column 1, lines 59-65) which meets the requirements of Formula (2) (column 3, lines 20-30). Examiner further notes that the structure of the compound falls within the definition of a leuco structure because it goes from a colorless state to a colored state (column 1, lines 60-65). It has been held that selection based upon a suitability for an intended purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.07. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the compound of Lin as the color developing compound of Aizu et al. because it has been shown in the art to be suitable for the intended purpose. Regarding claim 2, only that which is optional is recited; therefore, no components are required which define over Aizu et al., as modified. Regarding claim 3, only that which is optional is recited, therefore, no components are required which define over Aizu et al., as modified. Regarding claim 4, only that which is optional is recited; therefore, no components are required which define over Aizu et al., as modified. Regarding claim 5, Lin further discloses “wherein the compound represented by Formula (2) is represented by Formula (2a):
PNG
media_image2.png
226
155
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formula (2a), Rb1 and Rb3 each independently represent a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group (column 3, lines 20-30),” but fails to disclose “Rb1 and Rb3 each independently represent a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group having 2 or more carbon atoms.” However, Lin does teach that the substituent on the nitrogen can be an alkyl radical from 1 to four carbon atoms (column 1, lines 44-45). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to change the methyl substituent to, for example, ethyl, because Lin teaches using both as the substituent. See MPEP §2144.07. Regarding claim 6, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the polymerization initiator comprises a compound A represented by Formula (Ia) and one or more compounds B selected from the group consisting of a compound represented by Formula (Ib) and a compound represented by Formula (Ic):
PNG
media_image3.png
135
522
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formulae (Ia) to (Ic), R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6 are each independently a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group having 2 to 9 carbon atoms or a substituted or unsubstituted alkoxy group having 2 to 9 carbon atoms; at least one selected from the group consisting of R3 and R4 is different from R1 or R2; a difference between a total number of carbon atoms in R1 and R2 and a total number of carbon atoms in R3 and R4 is 0 to 4; a difference between the total number of carbon atoms in R1 and R2 and a total number of carbon atoms in R5 and R6 is 0 to 4; and X1, X2, and X3 are each independently a counter anion (paragraph 208).” Regarding claim 7, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the infrared absorber comprises a compound represented by Formula (X):
PNG
media_image4.png
156
343
media_image4.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formula (X), Ar11 and Ar12 each independently represent an atomic group necessary for forming a substituted or unsubstituted aromatic ring or for forming a substituted or unsubstituted heteroaromatic ring; R11 and R12 each independently represent a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group; R13 represents a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group, a substituted or unsubstituted aryl group, or a substituted or unsubstituted heteroaryl group; R14 represents a hydrogen atom, a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group, a substituted or unsubstituted aryl group, or a substituted or unsubstituted heteroaryl group; Y’s each independently represent an oxygen atom, a sulfur atom, or a dialkylmethylene group represented by >C(R15R16); R15 and R16 each independently represent a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group having 1 to 4 carbon atoms, A1 and A2 each independently represent a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group or an atomic group including 2 or 3 carbon atoms necessary for forming a substituted or unsubstituted 5- or 6-membered non-aromatic carbon ring by linking to each other; and Za represents a counter ion that neutralizes an electric charge (paragraphs 153 and 541-566).”
Regarding claim 8, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the image-recording layer further comprises one or more compounds selected from the group consisting of a compound represented by Formula (Le-10) and a compound represented by Formula (Z-4):
PNG
media_image5.png
158
203
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formula (Le-10), Ar1’s each independently represent an aryl group or a heteroaryl group; and Ar2’s each independently represent an aryl group having a substituent on at least one ortho position or a heteroaryl group having a substituent on at least one ortho position (page 29, S-5);
PNG
media_image6.png
136
239
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formula (Z-4), Rza1 represents a hydrogen atom, an alkyl group, or an alkoxy group; Rzb1 to Rzb4 each independently represent a hydrogen atom, an alkyl group, or an aryl group; Rzb1 and Rzb2 may be linked to each other to form a ring structure; Rzb3 and Rzb4 may be linked to each other to form a ring structure; X represents O or NR; R represents a hydrogen atom, an alkyl group, an aryl group, or a heteroaryl group, and Y1 and Y2 each independently represent CH or N.”
Examiner notes that Aizu et al. teach using one of each kind of color developing agents, or also using two or more color developing agents (paragraph 439). Therefore, using S-5 in combination with others would be obvious because Aizu et al. specifically teaches using more than one. Regarding claim 11, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the polymerizable compound comprises a polymerizable compound having functionalities of 7 or more (paragraph 48).” Regarding claim 12, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the image-recording layer further comprises an oil agent (paragraph 372: Examiner interprets higher fatty acid derivative to be an ‘oil agent).” Regarding claim 13, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the support has an aluminum plate and an anodic oxide film of aluminum disposed on the aluminum plate, the anodic oxide film is positioned closer to the image-recording layer than the aluminum plate is, the anodic oxide film has micropores extending in a depth direction from a surface of the anodic oxide film on the image-recording layer side, and an average diameter of the micropores within the surface of the anodic oxide film is more than 10 nm and 100 nm or less (paragraph 618).” Regarding claim 14, Aizu et al. further disclose “wherein the micropores are each composed of a large diameter portion that extends to a position at a depth of 10 nm to 1,000 nm from the surface of the anodic oxide film and a small diameter portion that is in communication with a bottom portion of the large diameter portion and extends to a position at a depth of 20 nm to 2,000 nm from a communicate position, an average diameter of the large diameter portion within the surface of the anodic oxide film is 15 nm to 100 nm, and an average diameter of the small diameter portion at the communicate position is 13 nm or less (paragraph 619).”
Regarding claim 15, Aizu et al. further teach “a method of preparing a lithographic printing plate, comprising: imagewise exposing the lithographic printing plate precursor according to claim 1 (paragraph 693); and supplying at least one selected from the group consisting of a printing ink and dampening water to the exposed precursor on a printer to remove an image-recording layer in a non-image area (paragraph 693).” Regarding claim 16, Aizu et al. further teach “a lithographic printing method comprising: imagewise exposing the lithographic printing plate precursor according to claim 1 (paragraph 694); supplying at least one selected from the group consisting of a printing ink and dampening water to the exposed precursor on a printer to remove an image-recording layer in a non-image area and to prepare a lithographic printing plate (paragraph 694); and performing printing using the obtained lithographic printing plate (paragraph 694).” Regarding claim 19, Lin further discloses “wherein the -NRa1Ra2 in Formula (2) is -N(CH3)2 (column 3, lines 20-30).”
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizu et al. and Lin, further in view of Sato et al. (US 2018/0162979). Regarding claim 9, Aizu et al. further disclose that the image recording layer includes a polymerization inhibitor (paragraph 372), but fail to disclose “a compound represented by Formula (Ph):
PNG
media_image7.png
96
319
media_image7.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formula (Ph), XP represents O, S, or NH; YP represents N or CH; RP1 represents a hydrogen atom or an alkyl group; RP2 and RP3 each independently represent a halogen atom, an alkylthio group, an arylthio group, an alkoxy group, an aryloxy group, an alkyl group, an aryl group, an acylthio group, or an acyl group; and mp and np each independently represent an integer of 0 to 4.”
However, it has been held that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for its intended use is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.07. Sato et al. teach using phenothiazine as a polymerization inhibitor in the photosensitive layer of a lithographic printing plate precursor (paragraph 301). Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use phenothiazine as the inhibitor in the precursor of Aizu et al. because it has been shown in the art to be suitable for the intended purpose.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizu et al. and Lin, further in view of Van Aert et al. (US2005/0106501). Regarding claim, Aizu et al., as modified, disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 1 above, except “wherein the image-recording layer further comprises a polymer having a structural unit represented by Formula (I):
PNG
media_image8.png
142
143
media_image8.png
Greyscale
wherein in Formula (I), R11 and R12 each independently represent a hydrogen atom or an alkyl group: R13 represents a hydrogen atom or a monovalent substituent; L11 and L12 each independently represent a single bond or a divalent linking group; and Rh represents a substituent including two or more silicon atoms.” However, Aizu et al. do disclose that the image recording layer can have a hydrophilic precursor which is capable of converting to hydrophobic with application of heat (paragraph 373). Van Aert et al. disclose a polymer for a printing plate precursor that switches from hydrophilic to hydrophobic upon exposure to heat (abstract) which meets the requirements of the formula (paragraph 44). It has been held that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for its intended use is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.07. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the polymer/compound of Van Aert et al. because it has been shown in the art to be suitable for the intended purpose.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizu et al. and Lin, further in view of Luo et al. (CH115491924A). Regarding claim 20, Aizu et al., as modified, disclose all that is claimed, as in claim 1 above, including that more than one type of color developing agent can be used (paragraph 439), and that crystal violet lactone is an example of one to use (paragraph 437), but fail to disclose “wherein the image-recording layer comprises the compound represented by Formula (1). Luo et al. disclose that 3-(4-dimethylamino)-3-(1-butyl-2-methyl-indol-3-yl)-6-dimethylaminophthalide is a known coloring agent, along with crystal violet lactone (paragraph [n0010]). It has been held that substituting equivalents known for the same purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.06. It has been held that selection based upon a suitability for an intended purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.07. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use another color developing agent (such as crystal violet lactone) in addition to the one represented by Formula (2) because Aizu et al. specifically teach using more than one, and further to: substitute 3-(4-dimethylamino)-3-(1-butyl-2-methyl-indol-3-yl)-6-dimethylaminophthalide for the crystal violet lactone because it has been shown in the art to be an equivalent coloring agent to crystal violet lactone; and/or use 3-(4-dimethylamino)-3-(1-butyl-2-methyl-indol-3-yl)-6-dimethylaminophthalide as another color developing agent because it has been shown in the art to be suitable for the intended purpose.
Claim(s) 1 and 20 is/are alternately rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aizu et al. in view of Luo et al. (CH115491924A). Regarding claims 1 and 20, Aizu et al. disclose “an on-press development type lithographic printing plate precursor (title) comprising: a support (abstract); and an image-recording layer on the support (abstract), wherein the image-recording layer comprises an infrared absorber (paragraph 30), a polymerization initiator (paragraph 19), a polymerizable compound (paragraph 47), and one or more” color developing compounds (paragraphs 393 and 439), including crystal violet lactone (paragraph 437). Aizu et al. fail to disclose that the color developing compounds is a compound represented by Formula (1), but do disclose that the color developing agent is preferably an acid color developing agent that is a leuco colorant (paragraph 398), but that the leuco colorant is not particularly limited so long as it has a leuco structure (paragraph 399).
Luo et al. disclose that 3-(4-dimethylamino)-3-(1-butyl-2-methyl-indol-3-yl)-6-dimethylaminophthalide is a known coloring agent, along with crystal violet lactone (paragraph [n0010]). It has been held that substituting equivalents known for the same purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.06. It has been held that selection based upon a suitability for an intended purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP §2144.07. Therefore, at the time of the filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to: substitute 3-(4-dimethylamino)-3-(1-butyl-2-methyl-indol-3-yl)-6-dimethylaminophthalide for the crystal violet lactone because it has been shown in the art to be an equivalent coloring agent to crystal violet lactone; and/or use 3-(4-dimethylamino)-3-(1-butyl-2-methyl-indol-3-yl)-6-dimethylaminophthalide as another color developing agent because it has been shown in the art to be suitable for the intended purpose.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA D ZIMMERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 9:30AM-6:30PM, First Fridays: 9:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JOSHUA D ZIMMERMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights