Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/617,196

INK JET RECORDING METHOD AND METHOD OF PRODUCING LAMINATE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Examiner
MCMILLION, TRACEY M
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Fujifilm Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
545 granted / 623 resolved
+19.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
657
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
56.2%
+16.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 623 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 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. 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. Claim(s) 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (WO 2021131496) in view of Lester (US 5,966,150) and further in view of Kawai (US 2022/0002570). With regard to claim 1, Sato discloses an ink jet recording method comprising: preparing a white ink containing water and a white pigment [Para. 0009, See Also Para. 0068, 0071]; preparing a colored ink containing water and a color pigment [Para. 0009, 0023]; applying the colored ink onto an impermeable base material [resin substrate; Para. 0009, 0077] using an ink jet method to obtain a colored image [Para. 0009]; and applying the white ink onto the colored image using an ink jet method [Para. 0009] to obtain a white image [Para. 0009]. Sato does not explicitly disclose applying the white ink onto the colored image to obtain a white image having a surface roughness Ra of 0.10 um to 0.40 um and wherein a content of the white pigment in the white ink is from 14% by mass to 25% by mass with respect to a total amount of the white ink. However, Lester teaches a polyethylene layer comprising white pigment (preferably TiO.sub.2) with an upper surface roughness of between 0.2 and 2.0 micrometers [Col. 9; lines 61-Col. 10; line 1]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obtain a white image having a surface roughness Ra of 0.10 um to 0.40 um to help minimize glare. In addition, Kawai teaches a content of a white pigment in a white ink is from 5% by mass to 20% by mass with respect to a total amount of the white ink [Claim 7]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a white ink with a content of white pigment from 14%-25% to improve the covering property of the image and the adhesiveness of the image. With regard to claim 2, Sato’s modified ink jet recording method discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Lester also discloses wherein the white image has a surface roughness Ra of 0.15 um to 0.30 um. [Col. 9; lines 61-Col. 10; line 1] With regard to claim 3, Sato’s modified method discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Sato also discloses wherein an amount of the white pigment in the white image is 0.7 g/m² or greater [Para. 0009]. With regard to claim 4, Sato’s modified method discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Sato also discloses wherein the white ink further contains resin particles [white ink is same as first except it contains a white colorant; Para. 0070, See also Para. 0036]. With regard to claim 5, Sato’s modified method discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Sato also disclose wherein the applying the white ink to obtain the white image includes: applying the white ink onto the colored image using an ink jet method [Para. 0009]; and heating and drying the white ink applied onto the colored image under a condition that a time from completion of the application to start of the heating and drying is 10 seconds or shorter, to obtain the white image [Para. 0106]. With regard to claim 6, Sato's ink jet recording method discloses all the limitations of claim 5 and Sato also discloses wherein the heating and drying are performed within 70 seconds from the start of the heating and drying [Para. 0104] but does not disclose heating and drying are performed under a condition that a residual solvent amount in the white ink applied onto the colored image is 0.10 g/m² or less. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform heating and drying within 70 seconds from the start of the heating and drying under a condition that a residual solvent amount of the white ink applied onto the colored image is 0.10 g/m² or less since heating accelerates the evaporation rate of solvents in the ink and thus, the less solvent available, the less time needed to heat and dry. With regard to claim 7, Sato's ink jet recording method discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Sato also discloses wherein the applying the colored ink to obtain the colored image includes: applying the colored ink onto the impermeable base material using an ink jet method [Para. 0009] but does not disclose heating and drying the colored ink applied onto the impermeable base material under a condition that a residual solvent amount is 0.10 g/m² or less, to obtain the colored image. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to heat and dry the colored ink applied onto the impermeable base material under a condition that a residual solvent amount is 0.10 g/m² or less, to obtain the colored image since heating and drying accelerates the evaporation rate of solvents in the ink. With regard to claim 8, Sato’s modified ink jet recording method discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and Sato also discloses further comprising: preparing a pretreatment liquid containing water and an aggregating agent [pretreatment liquid contain a resin and aqueous medium; Para. 0021; See also Para. 0216]; and applying the pretreatment liquid onto the impermeable base material, before the obtaining the colored image [Para. 0021], wherein the obtaining the colored image includes obtaining the colored image by applying the colored ink onto a region of the impermeable base material, to which the pretreatment liquid has been applied [Para. 0021]. With regard to claim 9, Sato's ink jet recording method discloses all the limitations of claim 8 and Sato also discloses wherein the applying the pretreatment liquid includes: applying the pretreatment liquid onto the impermeable base material [Para. 0021] but does not disclose heating and drying the pretreatment liquid applied onto the impermeable base material under a condition that a residual moisture content is 0.03 g/m² or less. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to heat and dry the pretreatment liquid applied onto the impermeable base material under a condition that a residual moisture content is 0.03 g/m² or less since heating accelerates the evaporation rate of solvents in the ink and thus the less solvent available, the less time needed to heat and dry. With regard to claim 10, Sato discloses a method of producing a laminate, comprising: obtaining an image recorded material in which the colored image and the white image are disposed in this order on the impermeable base material using the ink jet recording method according to claim 1 [Para. 0009]; and laminating a base material for lamination on the white image of the image recorded material, to obtain a laminate [Para. 0190]. With regard to claim 11, Sato discloses an ink jet recording device [Para. 0003] configured to be used in the ink jet recording method according to claim 8 [Para. 0009], the device comprising a transport mechanism configured to transport the impermeable base material [Para. 0164], and the device further comprising: a wire bar coater configured to apply the pretreatment liquid; a first ink jet head configured to apply the colored ink; and a second ink jet head configured to apply the white ink, in this order from an upstream side in a transport direction of the impermeable base material [Para. 0164-0165]. With regard to claim 12, Sato’s modified ink jet recording method discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Sato also discloses wherein an average particle diameter of the white pigment in the white ink is from 250 nm to 550 nm [preferably 250 nm to 300 nm; Para. 0072]. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TRACEY M MCMILLION whose telephone number is (571)270-5193. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-2:30PM EST. 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 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 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. /RICARDO I MAGALLANES/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853 /TRACEY M MCMILLION/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 21, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 21, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 18, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600153
PRINTING APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING PRINTED MATTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594771
IMAGE RECORDING DEVICE INCLUDING THERMAL HEAD AND READER POSITIONED DOWNSTREAM OF THERMAL HEAD IN CONVEYING DIRECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594775
PRINTING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577729
PRESERVATION OF MOISTURE EVAPORATION AND BODY TEMPERATURE REGULATION PROPERTIES ON GARMENTS POST PRINTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578668
EXPOSURE HEAD AND IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+2.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 623 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month