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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 19 December 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 10-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 19 December 2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference cited in the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 26 April 2024, has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings received on 25 April 2024 are accepted.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Examiner’s Note
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okamura (US 2011/0261112).
With respect to claim 1, Okamura discloses a liquid ejection head comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 1A, element 110) configured to form a channel (Fig. 1A, element 126) for a liquid to be ejected (paragraph 0028);
an ejection port formation member (Fig. 1A, element 112) configured to form an ejection port (Fig. 1A, element 128), the liquid having passed through the channel being ejected via the ejection port (paragraph 0028);
a cover member (Fig. 1A, element 150) configured to bond to the ejection port formation member (paragraph 0032) at an opposite side to the substrate via an adhesive (Fig. 1B, element 144; paragraph 0030, i.e. -OH group); and
a thin film (Fig. 1B, element 140) formed on a face of the cover member (paragraph 0032), the face being on a side where the cover member is bonded to the ejection port formation member (paragraphs 0030-0032), the thin film containing silicon carbide, or any of carbon-containing silicon oxide (paragraph 0029), silicon nitride, and silicon oxynitride (paragraph 0029, i.e. inorganic oxide).
The examiner notes to applicant that the limitations concerning the cover member and adhesive are broad in scope and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Okamura as applied above.
With respect to claim 8, Okamura discloses the thin film (Fig. 1B, element 140) has a thickness of at least 30 nm and not more than 100 nm (paragraph 0042).
With respect to claim 9, Okamura discloses the thin film (Fig. 1B, element 140) has a film stress of at least 300 MPa and not more than 700 MPa as a compressive stress (paragraph 0029, i.e. intrinsic property of the inorganic oxide).
Allowable Subject Matter
1. Claim 2 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 primary reasons for allowance for claim 2 is that applicant’s claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having a thin film, wherein the thin film contains the silicon oxide and a proportion of oxygen to silicon in the silicon oxide is at least 5% and not more than 50%. It is this limitation, expressed in the claimed combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
2. Claim 7 is objected to for being dependent upon claim 2.
3. Claim 3 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 primary reasons for allowance for claim 3 is that applicant’s claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having an ejection port formation member and a cover member, wherein the ejection port formation member is comprised of a material containing an epoxy resin, and the cover member is comprised of a material containing silicon or a metal. It is this limitation, expressed in the claimed combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
4. Claims 4 and 5 are objected to for being dependent upon claim 3.
5. 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 primary reasons for allowance for claim 6 is that applicant’s claimed invention includes a liquid ejection head having a cover member, wherein the cover member has a thickness of at least 10 μm and not more than 50 μm. It is this limitation, expressed in the claimed combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
In view of the foregoing, the above claims have failed to patentably distinguish over the applied art.
The remaining references listed on forms 892 and 1449 have been reviewed by the examiner and are considered to be cumulative to or less material than the prior art references relied upon in the rejection above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Geoffrey Mruk whose telephone number is (571)272-2810. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30 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 (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.
/GEOFFREY S MRUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 02/02/2026