DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Example 1 of Table 1 in the reply filed on 12/23/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the ink for an image” lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (2024/0247164) in view of Araki (2022/0275235).
Regarding claim 1, Maeda teaches image recording method comprising:
applying an ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer onto an impermeable substrate ([0064]);
applying an ink jet ink onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate ([0044], note that the varnish is applied by ink jet printing and is itself an ink); and
irradiating the ink jet ink applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer on the impermeable substrate ([0044], note that the varnish layer is cured with UV light).
Maeda does not teach wherein the ink jet ink contains pigment and polymerizable monomers or wherein the ink jet ink is for electron beam curing. Araki teaches inks with these properties and wherein UV curing and electron beam curing are obvious variants (Araki, [0074], [0264]). 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 ink disclosed by Araki for both the alkali peelable ink and the ink jet printing ink disclosed by Maeda because doing so would amount to combining a known ink formulation with a knowing ink jet printing method to obtain predictable results. In other words, because Maeda does not go into detail in the formulation of its inks, it would have been obvious to look to Araki for such a teaching.
Upon combination, the printed product would have an impermeable substrate, an alkali peelable ink jet printed layer, any number of color layers on the peelable layer, and an optional varnish layer on the image layers.
Regarding claim 2, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1, wherein the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer contains a compound including an acid group (Araki, [0270]).
Regarding claim 3, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 2, wherein the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer is an ink jet ink for electron beam curing, containing polymerizable monomers (Araki, [0074], [0264]).
Regarding claim 4, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1, wherein the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer is an ink jet ink for electron beam curing, containing polymerizable monomers including an acid group (Araki, [0074], [0264], [0270]).
Regarding claim 5, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 3, wherein in a case where the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer is used as a peeling ink (note that this seems to be required by claim 1), and the ink jet ink for electron beam curing, containing a pigment and polymerizable monomers (Araki, [0074], [0264]), to be applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate, is used as an ink for an image, at least one of the peeling ink or the ink for an image satisfies at least one of a condition that the ink contains a high-molecular-weight initiator X (Araki, Table 9, Example C82, Speedcure 7010) which is a hydrogen abstraction-type polymerization initiator having a molecular weight of 500 or more, or a condition that a total content of polymerization initiators other than the high-molecular weight initiator X is less than 1% by mass (Araki, Table 9, Example C82, Note that the initiator is the same as that of the elected species and meets all limitations).
Note also that, according to MPEP 2144.05, there the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to arrive at workable or optimum ranges via routine experimentation. Here, all of the claimed limitations are present, and thus, even if the mass% limitation was not met, such a limitation would not be considered inventive.
Regarding claim 6, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 3, wherein in a case where the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer is used as a peeling ink, and the ink jet ink for electron beam curing, containing a pigment and polymerizable monomers, to be applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate, is used as an ink for an image, a proportion of polyfunctional polymerizable monomers in an entire amount of the polymerizable monomers contained in at least one of the peeling ink or the ink for an image is 60% by mass or more (Araki, [0081]-[0083]).
Note also that, according to MPEP 2144.05, there the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to arrive at workable or optimum ranges via routine experimentation. Here, all of the claimed limitations are present, and thus, even if the mass% limitation was not met, such a limitation would not be considered inventive.
Regarding claim 7, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1, wherein the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer is an ink jet ink (see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 8, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1, wherein the applying the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer further includes irradiating the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate with ultraviolet rays including radiation at a wavelength of 300 nm to 395 nm (Araki, [0357]).
Regarding claim 9, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1, wherein the applying the ink jet ink for electron beam curing further includes irradiating the ink jet ink for electron beam curing applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer on the impermeable substrate with ultraviolet rays including radiation at a wavelength of 300 nm to 395 nm (Araki, [0395]).
Regarding claim 10, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1, wherein in a case where the ink jet ink for electron beam curing, containing a pigment and polymerizable monomers, to be applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate, is used as an ink for an image, two or more kinds of the inks for an image are used (note that there are four standard ink colors), in the applying the ink jet ink for electron beam curing, two or more kinds of the inks for an image are applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate, and in the irradiating with electron beams, two or more kinds of the inks for an image applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer on the impermeable substrate are irradiated with electron beams (see claim 1 rejection, Note that two different colors of ink can form layers upon each other, each layer being subjected to electron beam curing).
Regarding claim 11, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 10, wherein two or more kinds of the inks for an image include a white ink (Araki, [0260], [0264]) containing a white pigment and a colored ink containing a colored pigment, in the applying the ink jet ink for electron beam curing, the white ink and the colored ink are applied in this order onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer applied onto the impermeable substrate, and in the irradiating with electron beams, the white ink and the colored ink applied onto the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer on the impermeable substrate are irradiated with electron beams (See claim 1 rejection, Again, note that any number of colored ink layers can be sequentially applied on top of the alkali peelable layer and cured between color layers with an electron beam).
Regarding claim 13, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the ink set for an impermeable substrate, comprising: an ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer; and an ink jet ink for electron beam curing, containing a pigment and polymerizable monomers (see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 14, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the ink set for an impermeable substrate according to claim 13, wherein the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer contains a compound including an acid group (see claim 2, rejection).
Regarding claim 15, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the ink jet recording device configured to be used in the ink jet recording method according to claim 1, the device comprising a transport table configured to transport the impermeable substrate, and the device further comprising: a first ink jet head configured to apply the ink for forming an alkali-peelable layer; a first pinning exposure apparatus; a second ink jet head configured to apply the ink jet ink for electron beam curing, a second pinning exposure apparatus; and electron beam irradiation apparatus; in this order from an upstream side in a transport direction of the impermeable substrate (see claim 1 rejection, Note that Maeda in view of Araki necessarily has a head for ejecting alkali peelable ink and a head for ejecting image forming ink and UV and electron beam irradiators for curing the alkali peelable ink and the image forming ink, respectively).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda in view of Araki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Miyazaki (2021/0039363).
Regarding claim 12, Maeda in view of Araki teaches the image recording method according to claim 1. Maeda in view of Araki does not teach wherein the impermeable substrate is a beverage container made of a resin or a food packaging material made of a resin. Miyazaki teaches this (Miyazaki, [0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a bottle of the construction disclosed by Miyazaki in the method disclosed by Maeda in view of Araki because doing so would amount to combining a known print substrate with a known print method to obtain predictable results.
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