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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
in paragraph [0122], the last sentence mentions “pretreatment liquid described above”. The pretreatment liquid is only briefly mentioned as a potential aspect of the invention in paragraph [0006], <7>, but the pretreatment liquid is not described until starting at the later paragraph [0128];
in paragraphs [0123] and [0227], the Condition a3 has “[A-B]” which is inconsistent with all other instances of “[A - B]”. It is advised to change the term “described above” to “described below” or to rearrange the paragraphs such that the pretreatment liquid description precedes the mention in paragraph [0122].
Appropriate correction is required.
It is also suggested by the examiner for “AkV” and “BmV” in various parts of the application be adjusted to “A kV” and “B mV” for improved clarity with the difference in values [A - B] defined using only “A” and “B” with no units.
It is also suggested by the examiner to revise the language of paragraph [0006], <9 > and <10>, to be more concise by changing “at least one colored ink and the at least one white ink” to “ink set” for instances after the ink set is defined at the start of <8>. Revised claim language may read:
“<9> The ink jet recording method according to <8>, in which the difference [A - B] for an ink to be applied last is greatest among the differences [A - B] for the ink set.
<10> The ink jet recording method according to <8 > or <9>, in which in a case where n represents an integer of 2 or greater for the ink set, the difference [A - B] for an n-th ink in application order is greater than or equal to the difference [A - B] for an n-1-th ink in application order, and the difference [A - B] for an ink to be applied last is greater than the difference [ A - B] for an ink to be applied first.”
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
ink applying” should be “ink applying step” in claims 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8; and
“pretreatment liquid applying” should be “pretreatment liquid applying step” in claim 7
as is understood and clearly written in the specification paragraph [0006]: <1>, <2>, <3>, <7>, and <8>.
It is also suggested by the examiner for “AkV” and “BmV” to be adjusted to “A kV” and “B mV” for improved clarity with the difference in values defined using only “A” and “B” with no units.
It is also suggested by the examiner to revise the language of claims 9 and 10 to be more concise by changing “at least one colored ink and the at least one white ink” to “ink set” for instances after the ink set is defined at the start of claim 8. Revised claim language may read:
“9. The inkjet recording method according to claim 8,
wherein the difference [A - B] for an ink to be applied last is greatest among the differences [A - B] for the ink set.
10. The ink jet recording method according to claim 8,
wherein in a case where n represents an integer of 2 or greater for the ink set, the difference [A - B] for an n-th ink in application order is greater than or equal to the difference [A - B] for an n-1-th ink in application order, and the difference [A - B] for an ink to be applied last is greater than the difference [A - B] for an ink to be applied first.”
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, 4, 6, 7, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dannhauser et al. (US 9,376,582 B1), hereinafter referred to as Dannhauser.
Regarding claim 1, Dannhauser teaches an ink jet recording method (“a method of printing water-based inks on water-impermeable, low-surface-energy substrates”; col. 4, ll. 41-42) comprising:
an ink applying step of applying an ink containing water onto an impermeable base material using an ink jet method (“one or more water-based ink compositions are deposited in a predetermined pattern with an inkjet deposition system”; col. 4, ll. 40-42 and 56-58).
Dannhauser does not explicitly teach that the ink is applied onto the impermeable base material under a condition that a polarity of static electricity on a surface of the impermeable base material to which the ink is applied is opposite to a polarity of a zeta potential of the ink.
Dannhauser teaches the zeta potential of the water-based inks as negative (col. 13, ll. 46-49). Dannhauser also teaches an increase in surface energy to improve ink adhesion by modifying the surface properties of the impermeable substrate by methods including corona discharge treatment, plasma discharge treatment, flame ionization treatment (col. 5, ll. 62-67) with corona treatment being preferred (col. 6, ll. 1-5). Additionally, the substrate is coated with a water-based tie-layer and water-based ink-receptive layer before ink applying to further improve the ink adhesion (col. 6, ll. 60-67).
The steps taught by Dannhauser for treatment of the medium are comparable to the steps disclosed in the specification of the claimed invention that result in the static electricity of the impermeable base material to have a polarity opposite to that of the polarity of the zeta potential of the ink. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the ink onto the impermeable base material under a condition that a polarity of static electricity on a surface of the impermeable base material to which the ink is applied is opposite to a polarity of a zeta potential of the ink, as suggested by Dannhauser. This would have been done to further improve the ink adhesion, as taught by Dannhauser at least at col. 6, ll. 60-66.
Regarding claim 4, Dannhauser teaches an inkjet recording method according to claim 1, however Dannhauser does not teach the zeta potential of the ink is in a range of -80 mV to -30 mV.
Dannhauser does teach the zeta potential as -30 mV or less (“Anionically stabilized water-based pigment inks 500 exhibit a zeta potential that is preferably less than (more negative than) -30 m V, more preferably less than -40 m V, most preferably less than -50 mV”; col. 13, ll. 50-53). MPEP 2144.05 I states “In the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” The claimed range for zeta potential of the ink of -80 mV to -30 mV overlaps with the zeta potential range taught by Dannhauser. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a zeta potential less than -30 mV for the ink to be applied as taught by Dannhauser.
Regarding claim 6, Dannhauser teaches an inkjet recording method according to claim 1, wherein the impermeable base material is a resin base material (water-impermeable substrate materials include poly(ethylene terephthalate), polyimides, polyethylene, polypropylene; col. 5, ll. 36-48).
Regarding claim 7, Dannhauser teaches an inkjet recording method according to claim 1 further comprising:
a pretreatment liquid applying step of applying a pretreatment liquid that contains water and an aggregating agent onto the impermeable base material before the ink applying step (water-based tie-layer 301 may include epoxy resins; col. 7, ll. 31-39; water-based ink-receptive layer 401 may include metal salts such as calcium chloride, calcium acetate, calcium nitrate, magnesium chloride, magnesium acetate, magnesium nitrate, barium chloride, barium nitrate, aluminum chloride, and aluminum nitrate; col. 9, ll. 23-29; Fig. 2),
wherein, in the ink applying step, the ink is applied onto a region of the impermeable base material to which the pretreatment liquid has been applied (a water-based tie layer 301 and water-based ink-receptive layer 401 coat the water impermeable substrate 100 to improve the adhesion of water-based pigment ink 501; col.6, ll. 38-67; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Dannhauser teaches an inkjet image recording device to be used in the ink jet recording method according to claim 7 (“FIG. 1 is a schematic of a system for practicing the method of the present invention.”; Brief Description of the Drawings; Fig. 1), the device comprising:
a wire bar coater configured to apply the pretreatment liquid (“In-line application of the water-based tie-layer 301 and the water-based ink-receptive layer 401 are performed by the various available coating applications methods, including but not limited to… rod coating”; col. 8, ll. 8-12),
and an ink jet head configured to apply the ink (fixed array inkjet deposition system 600; col. 8, ll. 54-55, Fig. 1),
in this order from an upstream side in a transport direction of the impermeable base material (“Regardless of the coating application system and configuration for Coating System A 300 and Coating System B 400, the water-based tie-layer 301 and the water-based ink-receptive layer 401 should be substantially dried prior to the deposition of the water-based pigment inks 500.”; col. 8, ll. 35-39; Fig, 1).
Dannhauser does not explicitly teach the inkjet device as having a transport mechanism configured to transport the impermeable base material, however Dannhauser does teach the impermeable substrate as moving at 200 meters per minute in a process direction (col. 8, ll. 55-57; Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to observe the system taught by Dannhauser as having a transport mechanism in order for the substrate to be moving in a process direction (arrow; Fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 5, and 8-10 are 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 are statements of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, Dannhauser teaches an inkjet recording method according to claim 1, however Dannhauser does not explicitly teach in the ink applying step, the ink is applied onto the impermeable base material under a condition that in a case where an amount of the static electricity on the surface of the impermeable base material to which the ink is applied is defined as A kV and the zeta potential of the ink is defined as B mV, a difference [A - B] which is a value obtained by subtracting B from A is in a range of 30 to 110.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date may have been drawn to a method similar to Dannhauser wherein surface energy of the impermeable substrate is increased to improve ink adhesion rather than increasing static electricity to improve electrostatic attraction force of the ink to the impermeable base material.
Claim 3 would be allowable because it is dependent on claim 2.
Regarding claim 5, Dannhauser teaches an inkjet recording method according to claim 1, however Dannhauser does not explicitly teach an amount of the static electricity on the surface of the impermeable base material to which the ink is applied is in a range of 10 kV to 30 kV.
Regarding claim 8, Dannhauser does not teach the ink applying step as satisfying Condition a3,
Condition a3: in a case where an amount of the static electricity on the identical surface of the impermeable base material is defined as AkV and the zeta potential of each of the at least one colored ink and the at least one white ink is defined as BmV, a difference [A - B] which is a value obtained by subtracting B from A is in a range of 30 to 110 in all the inks.
Claims 9 and 10 would be allowable because they are dependent on claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ohnishi (US 2020/0047524 A1) teaches a printing apparatus that applies a polarity to a medium opposite to a polarity of an ink using a polarity applier ([0009]). The medium may be an impermeable medium, including one made of resin ([0007]). The polarity applier may be a charger ([0011], [0019]) which is preferred to be shield type corona ion charger ([0021]).
Fujii (US 2016/0289471 A1) teaches a printing apparatus ([0324]; Fig. 1) with a water-based pigment dispersion (abstract) applied after a treatment liquid is rolled onto the medium with an aggregating component (treatment liquid application section 12; [0039]; [0325]; Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYRA M VAN KREUNINGEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9423. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 9:00am-6:00pm and Fri 9:00am-1:00pm.
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.
11 February 2026
/KYRA MELOR VAN KREUNINGEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853