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 .
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) 2-3, 16, 18, 21, 23-25, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 9975327), in view of Ookubo et al. (US 2013/0000499) and Codos (US 2002/0024544).
Regarding to claims 2, 16, 18, 21, 23-24, 27:
Yang et al. discloses a computer-implemented method for printing a pattern on a curved surface of a substrate (FIGs. 5B and 7C, element WATER BOTTLE) placed in a printing position to be printed by a printhead (FIGs. 5B and 7C, element PRINT HEAD) of an inkjet printing device, wherein the printhead is as one single component with a plurality of printing nozzles (FIGs. 5B and 7C, element PRINT HEAD), the method comprising:
placing the substrate in a printing position to be printed on by the printhead, wherein the printhead and the substrate are stationary to each other after the substrate has been placed in the printing position and during the printing process (FIGs. 5B and 7C: The printhead and the water bottle are in the printing position to face each other, wherein during the printing, the printhead and the bottle are stationary),
determining at least one printing parameter value while the spectacle lens substrate in the printing position faces the printhead (FIG. 3: The individual jet time (328) reads on the claimed printing parameter value);
grouping the plurality of printing nozzles into at least two printing nozzle groups (column 5, lines 45-50: The printing nozzles are grouped at least in two groups: Group I: Ejectors that are further from the object. Group II: Ejectors that are closer to the object); and
individually determining the printing parameter value for at least one adjustable printing parameter of each printing nozzle group (column 5, lines 45-50: The time to fire each nozzle group (closer and further) is individually controlled so that ink drops ejected from the groups are landing on the curved surface about the same time),
wherein a number of printing nozzles depends on geometric features of the substrate facing the printhead (FIG. 5A-B: Due to the curve of the bottle surface, the distance h(x,y) from each nozzle of the printhead surface to the bottle surface is difference; as a result, each nozzle is considered as a nozzle group having a distinct distance to the bottle surface), and
wherein the at least two printing nozzle groups are configured to print the pattern within a single printing pass (column 5, lines 35-50 and FIG. 5B: The plurality of printing nozzles are configured to print within a single printing pass but at different firing timing to compensate for the difference in the distance).
Yang et al. even though teaches obtaining at least some of the geometric features of the substrate before the substrate has been placed in the printing position (FIG. 2). In other words, in Yang’s printing apparatus, the sensor for sensing the bottle surface and the printhead are arranged in a manner that does not allow deriving the geometric features of the substrate after the substrate has been placed in the printing position.
Codos discloses an inkjet printing apparatus comprising an inkjet printhead to eject inkdrops on a curved surface (FIG. 2A: The printhead 30 having a nozzle 41 jetting inkdrops on the curve surface 16). The inkjet printhead comprises sensors for sensing the curved surface to provide the geometric feature of the curved surface when the curved surface is placed facing the printhead for printing purpose (FIG. 2A: The sensors 40b detect the curved surface 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date to modify Yang’s printhead to attach the sensors for sensing the substrate/object surface to the printhead surface in order to sense the substrate/object surface and adjust the printhead printing operation accordingly during the printing operation to gain the printing quality as disclosed by Codos (FIG. 2A).
Yang et al. even though teaches the inkjet printing process for forming images on a curved surface, Yang et al. is silent wherein the curved surface is the curved surface of a spectacle lens substrate.
Ookuto et al. discloses a printing process for performing printing images from a printhead on a curved surface of a spectacle lens substrate (FIG. 8A-D).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date to use Yang’s printing process to form images on the spectacle lens substrate as disclosed by Ookuto et al. Beside, it is just an intended use to use Yang’s printing process to form images on the spectacle lens substrate, such intended use does not carry patentable weight however.
Regarding to claims 3, 16, 24-25: wherein the at least one adjustable printing parameter is selected from the group consisting of an ejection temperature, a jetting duration, a jetting frequency, a norm value, a wave form parameter, and an adjustable ink property (Yang et al.: The firing timing for each printing nozzle is one of parameters of a waveform that is adjusted depending on the distance from a nozzle to the curved printing surface), wherein the printing parameter value for the at least one adjustable printing parameter of each printing nozzle group is individually determined such that a tilt angle of the printhead relative to the surface of the spectacle lens substrate does not have to be adjusted prior to printing and/or during printing (Both Ookubo et al. and Yang et al. do not teach tilting the printhead relative to the curve surface prior or during printing).
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 9975327), in view of Ookubo et al. (US 2013/0000499) and Codos (US 2002/0024544), and further in view of Lin et al. (US 8248656).
Yang et al., as modified, discloses the claimed invention as discussed above, except wherein the at least one adjustable printing parameter for at least one printing nozzle group considers an anisotropic surface structuring and/or a surface hydrophobicity.
Lin et al. discloses a printing system comprising a printhead having a plurality of nozzles (FIG. 6) for jetting ink drops to form images on a substrate according to an image array data and process parameters, wherein the image array data and the process parameters are corrected according to a spreading factor based on characteristics of surface hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity of the substrate (column 13, lines 1-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date to modify Yang’s printing process, as modified, to adjust printing parameters for the printing nozzles in considering the surface hydrophobicity of the substrate as disclosed by Lin et al. to ensure the printing quality due to the spreading factor of ink drops on the substrate (column 13, lines 1-6).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s Remarks on the limitation “wherein at least some of the geometric features of the spectacle substrate are derived after the spectacle lens substrate has been placed in the printing position”, the Examiner cites that in Codos, the position of the substrate 15 facing the printhead 21 reads on the claimed printing position, wherein the substrate 15 has been placed in this position before the distance between the printhead and the substrate is derived, such distance represents the geometric feature of the substrate. In addition, one of ordinary skill in the art would modify Yang’s printing apparatus in view of Codos by placing the substrate (water bottle) in the printing position shown in Yang, FIG. 5B, then measuring the distance between each nozzle of the printhead to the water bottle to derive the geometric of the water bottle surface, and adjusting the printing parameter/operation accordingly.
Furthermore, in Yang’s FIG. 5b and FIG. 7C, the water bottle after placed in the printing position facing the printhead, the printhead nozzles jet ink drops to form images on the water bottle without requiring the movement of either the printhead or the water bottle.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment (adding a new claim – claim 31) necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAM S NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2151.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LAM S NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights