DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-15 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/18/2025. Applicant seems to traverse on the basis that Wang does not teach a wavelength range in the now-claimed 1200 to 1700 nm range, but this range has been amended to get around Wang, and when the Requirement was issued, the range limitation was met. Applicant further traverses the Requirement for Election of Species on the basis that the ink composition is not the main focus of the claims and the polymerization states are also not claimed currently. If these aspects are not currently claimed, the also do not currently affect the examination. The Requirements are maintained.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the entire recorded spectral range” lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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. It is not understood what this claim is intended to mean. A single determination, as claimed, would not seem to be able to be carried out “continuously.” Clarification is required.
Claim 19 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. The claim recites “wherein the board made of wood material…” But claim 6, from which claim 19 depends, recites wherein a claimed board can be made from wood, plastic, composite, etc. Thus, to recite “the board made of wood material” is indefinite because the limitations of claim 6 can be met without a board made of wood material. 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) 1-8, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (5,812,705) in view of Greisiger et al. (2016/0137863).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a method for determining the color deviation of at least one print decoration applied to at least one carrier material from a print template using only NIR spectroscopy, comprising the steps of:
recording of at least one NIR spectrum of several reference samples with the print template using at least one NIR measuring head in a wavelength range of 800 nm to 1100 nm (col. 6, lines 1-32),
applying the at least one printed decoration to the at least one carrier material by means of printing (col. 5, lines 23-27),
recording at least one NIR spectrum of the carrier material printed with the print decoration using the at least one NIR measuring head in a wavelength range of 800 nm to 1100 nm (col. 6, lines 1-32), and
determining the color deviation of the print decor by comparing with the at least one NIR spectrum recorded for the print template (col. 5, lines 23-27).
Wang does not teach wherein the recorded NIR spectrum is in the range of 1200 nm to 1700 nm.
Greisiger teaches this (Greisiger, [0110]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to record NIR spectrums in between 1200 nm and 1700 nm on the reference sample and the carrier material because doing so would allow for determining color deviation of invisible portions of the decoration, thereby ensuring security features printed were recorded in high quality. In other words, Greisiger teaches printing invisible features with NIR-reflective ink that requires 720-2,500 nm wavelength for detection. Thus, applying the deviation detection technique disclosed by Wang to the invisible ink disclosed Greisiger would result in all limitations being met.
Regarding claim 2, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein spectral data from the entire recorded spectral range are used to determine the color deviation (Wang, see fig. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein spectral data from the NIR spectral range between 1350 nm and 1600 nm are used to determine the color deviation (Greisiger, [0110]).
Regarding claim 4, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the determination of the color deviation is carried out continuously and online or offline (Wang, Note that the determination is carried out continuously).
Regarding claim 5, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one carrier material comprises at least one paper layer (Wang, col.3, lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 6, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one carrier material is a board made of a wood material, made of plastic, a wood material-plastic mixture, a composite material, a cement fibreboard, gypsum fibreboard, a WPC board (Wood Plastic Composites), or an SPC board (Stone Plastic Composites) (Greisiger, [0064).
Regarding claim 7, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the printed decoration is applied to the at least one carrier material by gravure printing processes or digital printing processes (Wang, col. 7, lines 20-33).
Regarding claim 8, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the ink used for printing is a water-soluble CMYK ink (Wang, col. 4, lines 4-20).
Regarding claim 18, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein the at least one paper layer is at least one base paper or at least one pre-treated, impregnated paper (Wang, col.3, lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 19, Wang in view of Greisiger teaches the method according to claim 6 wherein the board made of the wood material is a chipboard, medium-density fibreboard (MDF), high-density fibreboard (HDF), oriented strand board (OSB) or plywood board (Greisiger, [0064).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached 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, 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853