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
Claims 6-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/22/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukumoto et al. (2018/0281414) (hereinafter Fukumoto et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Fukumoto et al. teaches a liquid ejection chip (see Figs. 6F-6I) having a first flow channel substrate (131, Fig. 6I) and a second flow channel substrate (132, 6I) bonded to each other by using an adhesive (123, Fig. 6F) [Paragraphs 0060-0061], the first flow channel substrate (131) having an energy generation element (107, see Fig. 2H for reference, since it is not labeled in 6I) configured to generate energy for ejecting liquid and a first flow channel (113, see Fig. 2H since it is not labeled in Fig. 6I) configured to supply the liquid to the energy generation element (107) [Paragraph 0060], the second flow channel substrate (132) having a second flow channel (114, see Fig. 2H for reference, since it is not labeled in Fig. 6I) connecting to the first flow channel (114) [Paragraphs 0060-0063], wherein recess portions (see Figs. 6F-6I) are formed at each of a wall surface of the first flow channel (131) and a wall surface of the second flow channel (132), and in terms of at least one of depth and width of the recess portions (see Figs. 6F-6I), the first flow channel substrate (131) > the second flow channel substrate (132) [Paragraphs 0060-0065, see also Fig. 6F].
Regarding Claim 4, Fukumoto et al. teaches the liquid ejection chip (see Figs. 6F-6I), wherein the recess portions (see Figs. 6F-6I) are formed on an inner periphery of an opening portion (see Figs. 6F-6I) consecutively in a lamination direction in which the first flow channel substrate (131) and the second flow channel substrate (132) are laminated [See Figs. 6F-6I].
Regarding Claim 5, Fukumoto et a. teaches the liquid ejection chip (see Figs. 6F-6I), wherein the depth of the recess portions (see Figs. 6F-6I) is an average of depths on the wall surface etched under a same condition, and the width of the recess portions (see Figs. 6F-6I) is an average of widths on the wall surface etched under a same condition [see Figs. 6F-6I].
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukumoto et al. (2018/0281414) (hereinafter Fukumoto et al.).
Regarding Claim 2, Fukumoto et al. teaches the liquid ejection chip (see Figs. 6F-6I) [Paragraphs 0060-0065].
Fukumoto et al. fails to teach wherein in terms of at least one of the depth and the width, the recess portions at the first flow channel substrate are 1.5 times or more and 10 times or less larger than the recess portions at the second flow channel substrate.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide wherein in terms of at least one of the depth and the width, the recess portions at the first flow channel substrate are 1.5 times or more and 10 times or less larger than the recess portions at the second flow channel substrate, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. The motivation to combine the teachings of Fukumoto et al. with the holdings of In re Aller is for the purposes creating a bonded body and a complete liquid ejection chip [Paragraphs 0059-0074].
Allowable Subject Matter
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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for the allowance of claim(s) 3 is the inclusion of the limitation of a liquid ejection head that includes at a wall surface of a second flow channel in a second flow channel substrate, recess portions are two or more sizes in terms of at least one of depth and width, and in the second flow channel, in terms of at least one of the depth and width of the recess portions, the recess portions on a first surface side, which is a bond surface of the first and second flow channel substrates is greater than a second surface side, which is opposite the first surface of the second flow channel substrate. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination, that has not been found, taught, or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA SOLOMON whose telephone number is (571)272-1701. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30am -6pm, 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, Douglas 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.
/LISA SOLOMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853