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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 06/12/2023 and 05/15/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2023-096386 and JP2024-079384 applications, respectively as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1, 3-4, and 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikuma et al. (2004/0165033) (hereinafter Chikuma et al.) in view of Alvarez et al. (WO 2017/067614) (hereinafter Alvarez et al.) and Nakagawa et al. (9,605,170) (hereinafter Nakagawa et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Chikuma et al. teaches an ink jet recording method comprising recording an image by ejecting an ink from a recording head (1, Fig. 1) [Paragraphs 0014-0017] including: a plurality of ejection orifices (22, Fig. 2) each configured to eject the ink [Paragraph 0114]; an ejection element (25, Fig. 2) configured to generate energy for ejecting the ink [Paragraph 0114]; and a first flow path (23, Fig. 2) and a second flow path (24, Fig. 2) which communicate to each other between each of the plurality of ejection orifices (22) and the ejection element (25) and inside which the ink flows [Paragraph 0114], the ink jet recording method comprising: an ejection step of ejecting the ink from the plurality of ejection orifices (22) [Paragraphs 0114, 0119]; a flow step, which is separate from the ejection step, of flowing the ink in the first flow (23) path into the second flow path (24) [Paragraphs 0114, 0119], wherein the recording head is a recording head of a serial type which includes an ejection element substrate (see Fig. 2) including a plurality of ejection orifice arrays (see Fig. 4) each having the plurality of ejection orifices (22) arranged in a predetermined direction and which is scanned in a direction intersecting with an arrangement direction (see Fig. 4) of the ejection orifice arrays (see Fig. 4) [Paragraphs 0148, 0228], wherein the first flow path (23) and the second flow path (24) are arranged in parallel to a scanning direction of the recording head (1) and have the same flow direction of the ink [see Figs. 2 and 4], wherein the plurality of ejection orifice arrays (see Fig. 4) includes a first ejection orifice array (see Fig. 4) configured to eject a first ink and a second ejection orifice array (see Fig. 4) configured to eject a second ink [Paragraphs 0105-0108, 0121-0124, 0132-0141], and the first ejection orifice array (see Fig. 4) and the second ejection orifice array (see Fig. 4) are arranged on an upstream side and on a downstream side, respectively, with respect to the flow direction of the ink [Paragraph 0148 and Fig. 4].
Chikuma et al. fails to teach a step of warming the ink in the recording head and wherein a static surface tension ϒs1 of the first ink and a static surface tension ϒs2 of the second ink satisfy a relationship of ϒs1 ≥ ϒs2.
Alvarez et al. teaches a step of warming the ink in the recording head [Paragraphs 0011-0013, 0029].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a step of warming the ink in the recording head as taught by Alvarez et al. for the purposes of preventing, dissolving, and eliminating agglomerates that can block nozzles, thus improving image quality [Alavarez et al., Paragraphs 0015, 0018].
Alvarez et al. fails to teach a static surface tension ϒs1 of the first ink and a static surface tension ϒs2 of the second ink satisfy a relationship of ϒs1 ≥ ϒs2.
Nakagawa et al. teaches a static surface tension ϒs1 of the first ink and a static surface tension ϒs2 of the second ink satisfy a relationship of ϒs1 ≥ ϒs2 [Column 15 line 19-Column 15 line 12].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a static surface tension ϒs1 of the first ink and a static surface tension ϒs2 of the second ink satisfy a relationship of ϒs1 ≥ ϒs2 as taught by Nakagawa et al. for the purposes of improving the color developability and bronzing resistance of an image [Nakagawa et al., Column 14 lines 19-45].
Regarding Claim 3, Chikuma et al. teaches the ink jet recording method [Paragraphs 0014-0017, 0114, 0119, 0148, and 0228].
Chikuma et al. fails to teach wherein the first ink comprises a resin particle having a glass transition temperature Tg higher than a warming temperature of the recording head.
Alvarez et al. teaches a warming temperature of a recording head [Paragraphs 0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a warming temperature of the recording head as taught by Alvarez et al. for the purposes of softening agglomerates that can block nozzles and move them toward flow paths, which make it easier to expel them from the nozzles [Alavarez et al., Paragraph 0022].
Alvarez et al. fails to teach a first ink comprises a resin particle having a glass transition temperature Tg.
Nakagawa et al. teaches a first ink comprises a resin particle having a glass transition temperature Tg [Column 7 lines 4-32].
Nakagawa et al. fails to explicitly teach the glass transition temperature Tg of the first ink having a resin particle. However, Nakagawa et al. teaches that the resin particle is formed of a resin such as an acrylic resin. Acrylic resin can have a glass transition temperature Tg in the range of 65˚C to 165˚C [see Article attached: “Quantifying Acrylic Resin’s Glass Transition Temperature Shifts”, see Paragraph 2].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the first ink comprises a resin particle having a glass transition temperature Tg higher than a warming temperature of the recording head as taught by Chikuma et al. as modified by Alvarez et al. and Nakagawa et al. for the purposes of dissolving and eliminating agglomerates that can block nozzles, improving image quality [Alvarez et al., Paragraphs 0015, 0018] and improving color developability and bronzing resistance of an image [Nakagawa et al., Column 14 lines 19-45].
Regarding Claim 4, Chikuma et al. teaches the ink jet recording method [Paragraphs 0014-0017, 0114, 0119, 0148, and 0228].
Chikuma et al. fails to teach wherein the first ink has lightness higher than lightness of the second ink.
Alvarez et al. fails to teach wherein the first ink has lightness higher than lightness of the second ink.
Nakagawa et al. teaches wherein the first ink has lightness higher than lightness of the second ink [ABSTRACT and Column 7 lines 5-18].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the first ink has lightness higher than lightness of the second ink as taught by Chikuma et al. as modified by Alvarez et al. and Nakagawa et al. for the purposes of dissolving and eliminating agglomerates that can block nozzles, improving image quality [Alvarez et al., Paragraphs 0015, 0018] and improving color developability and bronzing resistance of an image [Nakagawa et al., Column 14 lines 19-45].
Regarding Claim 6, Chikuma et al. teaches the ink jet recording method, further comprising a cleaning step of wiping an ejection orifice surface having the plurality of ejection orifice arrays (see Fig. 4) arranged in a predetermined direction, wherein a system of the wiping is one of a system involving moving a wiper member in a direction parallel to the arrangement direction of the ejection orifice arrays (see Fig. 4) or a system involving pressing a nonwoven fabric against the ejection orifice surface to cause the nonwoven fabric to absorb an ink [Paragraphs 0111-0112, 0224].
Alvarez et al. fail to teach the ink jet recording method, further comprising a cleaning step of wiping an ejection orifice surface having the plurality of ejection orifice arrays arranged in a predetermined direction, wherein a system of the wiping is one of a system involving moving a wiper member in a direction parallel to the arrangement direction of the ejection orifice arrays or a system involving pressing a nonwoven fabric against the ejection orifice surface to cause the nonwoven fabric to absorb an ink.
Nakagawa et al. fail to teach the ink jet recording method, further comprising a cleaning step of wiping an ejection orifice surface having the plurality of ejection orifice arrays arranged in a predetermined direction, wherein a system of the wiping is one of a system involving moving a wiper member in a direction parallel to the arrangement direction of the ejection orifice arrays or a system involving pressing a nonwoven fabric against the ejection orifice surface to cause the nonwoven fabric to absorb an ink.
Regarding Claim 7, Chikuma et al. teaches the ink jet recording method, wherein a moving speed of the recording head (1) [Paragraphs 0119-0120].
Chikuma et al. fails to teach wherein a moving speed of the recording head during the scanning is 70 inches/sec or less.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a moving speed of the recording head during scanning is 70 inches/sec or less, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 216 (CCPA 1980). The combination of the teachings of Chikuma et al. and the holdings of In re Boesch is for the purposes of providing a quality image [Paragraph 0004].
Alvarez et al. fail to teach wherein a moving speed of the recording head during the scanning is 70 inches/sec or less.
Nakagawa et al. fail to teach wherein a moving speed of the recording head during the scanning is 70 inches/sec or less.
Regarding Claim 8, Chikuma et al. teaches the ink jet recording method [Paragraphs 0014-0017, 0114, 0119, 0148, and 0228].
Chikuma et al. further teaches ink flowing between the first and second flow path [Paragraphs 0114, 0119].
Chikuma et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein a flow speed of the ink during the flowing is 1.0 mm/s or more to 100.0 mm/s or less.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide wherein a flow speed of the ink during the flowing is 1.0 mm/s or more to 100.0 mm/s or less, 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 combination of the teachings of Chikuma et al. and the holdings of In re Aller is for the purposes of printing image data by discharging dots from the nozzles [Chikuma et al., Paragraph 0119].
Alvarez et al. fail to teach wherein a flow speed of the ink during the flowing is 1.0 mm/s or more to 100.0 mm/s or less.
Nakagawa et al. fail to teach wherein a flow speed of the ink during the flowing is 1.0 mm/s or more to 100.0 mm/s or less.
Regarding Claim 9, Chikuma et al. teaches the ink jet recording method [Paragraphs 0014-0017, 0114, 0119, 0148, and 0228].
Chikuma et al. further teaches a distance between the first ejection orifice array (see Fig. 4) and the second ejection orifice array (see Fig. 4) [See Fig. 4].
Chikuma et al. fails to explicitly teach a distance between the first ejection orifice array and the second ejection orifice array is 1.8 mm or less.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a distance between the first ejection orifice array and the second ejection orifice array is 1.8 mm or less, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 216 (CCPA 1980). The combination of the teachings of Chikuma et al. and the holdings of In re Boesch is for the purposes of printing an using multiple dot sizes and densities [Paragraphs 0122-0123].
Alvarez et al. fail to teach wherein a distance between the first ejection orifice array and the second ejection orifice array is 1.8 mm or less.
Nakagawa et al. fail to teach wherein a distance between the first ejection orifice array and the second ejection orifice array is 1.8 mm or less.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 5 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 is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for the allowance of claim(s) 2 is the inclusion of an ink jet recording method that includes the method steps of: an ejection step of ejecting ink from a plurality of ejections surfaces, wherein a first ink comprises a compound represented by the general formula (1):
PNG
media_image1.png
272
742
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in the general formula (1), "x" and "y" each independently represent a number of 0 or more, and x+y is 0 or more to 50 or less. It is these steps 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.
The primary reason for the allowance of claim(s) 5 is the inclusion of an ink jet recording method that includes the method steps of: an ejection step of ejecting ink from a plurality of ejections surfaces, wherein a specific gravity d1 of a first ink and a specific gravity d2 of a second ink stratifies a relationship of d1 ≥ d2. It is this step 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.
Claim 10 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for the allowance of claim(s) 10 is the inclusion of the limitation of an ink jet recording apparatus that includes a flow unit separate from an ejection element, that causes ink to flow from a first flow path into a second flow path. It is this limitation 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