DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention according to claims 1-9 and the species according to Example 7 in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged.
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) 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abe (2010/0219382) in view of Imamura et al. (2023/0017960).
Regarding claim 1, Abe teaches an epoxy resin mixture ([0095], jER828) and a powder curing agent ([0095], PN23J), wherein the epoxy resin mixture contains an epoxy resin that is liquid at normal temperature and a coumarone resin ([0061]) that is dissolvable in the epoxy resin (note that this is the case), wherein a weight average molecular weight of the epoxy resin mixture is 300 or more and 600 or less (note that JER828 meets the limitation).
Abe does not teach a liquid ejection head comprising: a recording element substrate configured to eject a liquid; a supporting member configured to support the recording element substrate and including a supply channel configured to supply a liquid to the recording element substrate; and
a channel member configured to supply a liquid to the supply channel, wherein at least one bonding surface between two members of any of the recording element substrate, the supporting member, and the channel member is made of an epoxy resin composition. Imamura teaches this (Imamura, see fig. 2, Note recording element substrate 1100, channel member 1200 and supply channel 1500, and note that the channel member and the recording element substrates are bonded with a thermosetting epoxy at [0041]-[0049]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the epoxy resin adhesive mixture disclosed by Abe as the thermosetting curable mixture disclosed by Imamura because doing so would amount to combining a known adhesive with a known structure bonded with adhesive to yield predictable results.
Upon combination of Imamura with Abe, the resultant device would meet the limitation: wherein the liquid ejection head contains a cured substance of an adhesive agent containing the epoxy resin composition
Regarding claim 2, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 1, wherein an equivalent of a functional group of the epoxy resin in the epoxy resin mixture is 100 or more and 200 or less (Abe, Note that jER828 meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 3, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 2. Regarding claim 2, Abe in view of Imamura does not teach wherein a content of the coumarone resin contained in the epoxy resin mixture is 10 parts by mass or more and 50 parts by mass or less to 100 parts by mass of the epoxy resin. However, MPEP 2144.05 states that, where the general conditions of a claimed invention are present in the prior art, it is not inventive to arrive at optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Here, all the conditions are present except for an amount coumarone resin in the mixture. This is appears to have been arrived upon by routine experimentation and thus is not inventive.
Regarding claim 4, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 3, wherein a hydroxyl value (mg KOH/g) of the coumarone resin is 50 or less (Abe, [0061], Note that coumarone-indene resins have hydroxyl values of approximately 32).
Regarding claim 5, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 1, wherein a softening point of a powder curing agent contained in the epoxy resin composition is 80°C or higher and 100°C or lower (Abe, [0095], Note that PN23J meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 6, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 5, wherein a content of the powder curing agent contained in the epoxy resin composition is 40 parts by mass or more and 65 parts by mass or less to 100 parts by mass of the epoxy resin (Abe, [0095], Note the 30 to 100).
While, Regarding claim 2, Abe in view of Imamura does not expressly teach the claimed range, MPEP 2144.05 states that, where the general conditions of a claimed invention are present in the prior art, it is not inventive to arrive at optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Here, all the conditions are present except for an amount of the powder during agent, which is off by 10%. This is appears to have been arrived upon by routine experimentation and thus is not inventive.
Regarding claim 7, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 6, wherein the powder curing agent is an amine-series curing agent (Abe, Note that PN23J meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 8, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 7, wherein an average particle diameter of the powder curing agent is 70 nm or less (Abe, Note that PN23J meets the limitation).
Regarding claim 9, Abe in view of Imamura teaches the liquid ejection head according to claim 1, wherein the epoxy resin composition contains a silane coupling agent (Abe, Note that jER828 meets the limitation).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, DOUGLAS X. RODRIGUEZ can be reached at 571-431-0716. 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853