Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/705,251

CONTINUOUS TYPE INKJET INK COMPOSITION, AND PRINTED MATTER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 16, 2025
Examiner
MULVANEY, ELIZABETH EVANS
Art Unit
1785
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sakata Inx Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
862 granted / 1099 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1122
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
43.9%
+3.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1099 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4/26/24, 6/21/24 and 3/20/25 have been considered by the examiner. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-4, 7-9, 12-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2017/0190926 (DE SAINT-ROMAIN). Regarding claim 1: The reference discloses an ink for continuous inkjet printing comprising: an organic diasazo dye (See claim 1 and 12 for C.I. Solvent Black 3), a resin (See claim 14), a conductivity imparting agent of an ionic compound having an anionic portion of an element selected from phosphorus or boron (See claim 19), and an organic solvent (See claim 1). Regarding claim 2: See claim 19 for hexafluorophosphate. Regarding claims 3 and 8: See claim 12 for black dye. Regarding claims 4, 9 and 13: See claim 14 for acrylic or vinyl resin. Regarding claims 7, 12 and 16: See claim 25 for printed matter on a substrate. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 5-6, 10-11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0190926 (DE SAINT-DOMAIN). Regarding claims 5-6, 10-11 and 14-15: The reference discloses the amount of solvent contains an amount of the solvents, such as ketone, in claim 5, the total amount of solvent in claim 10, the amount of dye in claim 13 and the amount of resin in claim 15. It is recognized that the amounts are not the specific amounts as claimed. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to vary the amounts of the individual components in the interest of optimizing the printing properties of the composition, i.e. one would adjust for improving the adherence of the composition to a substrate and to assure a viscosity proper for jet dispensing. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH EVANS MULVANEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1527. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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. /ELIZABETH E MULVANEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 16, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600204
DECORATIVE GLASS PANEL WITH THE APPEARANCE OF A NOBLE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600878
TOPCOAT LAYER, A LAMINATION FILM CONTAINING THE SAME, AND A DECORATIVE ARTICLE DECORATED BY SAID LAMINATION FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590385
SiC EPITAXIAL WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583986
DECORATIVE PANEL AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DECORATIVE PANELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588392
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+15.4%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1099 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month