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 1-6, in the reply filed on 7/29/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 which depends on claim 1 is to a composition. It is unclear if claim 4 is claiming a method or an article comprising the cured composition.
It is also unclear on to what the composition is being applied.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoh et al (20200238333) in view of Isaka et al (JP2013040257, English translation).
Itoh teaches a bright pigment dispersion.
Itoh, abstract, teaches an effect pigment dispersion comprising water, a flake aluminum pigment, and a cellulose-based rheology control agent.
Itoh, paragraphs 44-45 of the PGPUB, teaches examples of the cellulose-based rheology control agent in the effect pigment dispersion include C cellulose nanofibers,
cellulose nanocrystals, and the like. Of these, cellulose nanofibers are preferably used in terms of obtaining a coating film with excellent metallic luster. The cellulose nanofibers mentioned above are also referred to as cellulose nanofibrils, fibrillated cellulose, or nanocellulose crystals.
Itoh, paragraph 40 of the PGPUB, teaches when a vapor-deposition flake
aluminum pigment is used, the average thickness thereof is 0.01 to 0.2 µm, and preferably 0.02 to 0.1 µm. Moreover, in terms of the stability in the coating composition,
and the finish of the resulting coating film, the average particle size (D50) is 1 to 50 µm.
Although Itoh teaches the average particle size (D50) is 1 to 50 µm, Itoh does not teach a D90 particle size.
Isaka, abstract, teaches the coating material composition includes a complex
metal oxide pigment having a primary particle size of not less than 5 nm and not more
than 100 nm and a flake-like aluminum pigment.
Isaka teaches the scale-like aluminum pigment preferably has an average
particle diameter D50 in the range of 7 to 25 µm from the viewpoint of the finish of the
coated film and the brightness of the highlight.
Isaka teaches a D90 / D50 is within a range of 1.0 to 1.8. It is preferable to use it
from the viewpoint of highlight brightness and flip-flop property of the coating film
obtained by painting.
It 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 to have a D90/D50 ratio of 1 (therefore D90 would be 7 to 25 µm) as taught by
Isaka of the scale-like aluminum pigment as taught by Itoh to highlight brightness and
flip-flop property of the coating film obtained by painting.
Regarding claim 2, Itoh, paragraph 40 of the PGPUB, teaches when a vapor-deposition flake aluminum pigment is used, the average thickness thereof is 0.01 to 0.2 µm.
Regarding claim 3, Itoh, paragraph 89 of the PGPUB, teaches examples of the base resin include acrylic resins.
Regarding claim 4, Itoh, paragraph 119 of the PGPUB, teaches the monochrome checkered hiding power test paper specified in 4.1.2 of JIS K5600-4-1 is attached to a steel plate. Then, the coating composition is applied by inclined coating so that the film thickness continuously varies, and dried or cured.
The composition as taught by the references is the same as the composition as claimed in claim 4 and therefore it would be expected that the composition as taught by the references can be used in the same manner as claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Itoh, paragraphs 44-45 of the PGPUB, teaches examples of the cellulose-based rheology control agent in the effect pigment dispersion include C cellulose nanofibers, cellulose nanocrystals, and the like. Of these, cellulose nanofibers are preferably used in terms of obtaining a coating film with excellent metallic luster. The cellulose nanofibers mentioned above are also referred to as cellulose nanofibrils, fibrillated cellulose, or nanocellulose crystals.
Regarding claim 6, Itoh, paragraph 93 of the PGPUB, teaches when the solids content is adjusted to 2.5 mass %, the “B60 value” is preferably in the range of 40 to 400 mPa·s, and more preferably 40 to 350 mPa·s.
Itoh, paragraph 122 of the PGPUB, teaches the solids content of the effect pigment dispersion during coating is preferably adjusted to 0.1 to 15 mass %, based on the effect pigment dispersion, in terms of obtaining a coating film with excellent metallic luster.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20080264300 teaches organic pigment aqueous dispersions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE J COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5836. The examiner can normally be reached 10am- 6pm 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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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.
/STEFANIE J COHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1732 8/11/26
Prosecution Insights