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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/1/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-11 are 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.
Regarding claim 1:
This claim recites the limitation “the first flipped image” (line 6 of the claim). However, there is no antecedent basis for a flipped image.
Regarding claims 2-11:
These claims fail to remedy the deficiencies of claim 1, and therefore also fail to meet the requirements of this statute.
Further regarding claim 4:
This claim recites the limitation “the second flipped image” (line 5 of the claim). However, there is no antecedent basis for such a second flipped image.
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, 3-9, 11-12, 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niioka US 2007/0109341 A1 (hereinafter, “Niioka”) in view of JP3219398U (hereinafter, “JP398”) and JP3212639U (hereinafter, “JP639”).
Regarding claims 1, 12, 15-18:
Niioka discloses a method comprising:
rendering a first image file onto a computer (“host computer”: paragraph 89), wherein the first image file comprises at least one of a single solid color, multiple solid colors, and a graphical feature (paragraph 89);
transferring the first image file onto a printer software (paragraph 89);
printing the first image file onto a disc-shaped medium (paragraph 131).
Niioka does not expressly disclose printing a first flipped image onto a first clear vinyl record, and printing a solid white layer directly on top of the first image.
However, JP639 discloses a method of providing a decorative plate with a high level of aesthetic appeal by displaying designs on the front and back sides (paragraph 3) by printing a first flipped/reversed image (printed pattern 4), having at least one of a single solid color, multiple solid colors, and a graphical feature (paragraphs 13-14) onto a first clear substrate (transparent resin plate 1) and printing a solid white layer (white blocking layer 5) directly on top of the first image (Fig. 1); and
JP398 discloses a method of providing a record with excellent design (paragraph 4) by printing images (first printed layer 20: Fig. 2a) onto a clear blank vinyl record (record 1: paragraph 10), wherein the first clear blank vinyl record is pre-cut and measures 12 inches, 10 inches, or 7 inches in diameter (paragraphs 2, 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Niioka’s method to produce an attractive two-sided decorative panel in the manner taught by JP639, as so printing solid white layers on flipped image layers on the clear substrates. It would have been further obvious to utilize clear blank vinyl records, as taught by JP398, as the desired clear substrates, so as to enable production of attractive two-sided decorative vinyl records.
Regarding claims 3 and 14:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claims 1/12, and Niioka also disclose that the first image is rendered by a human administrator (the “user”: paragraphs 87-89).
Regarding claim 4:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 1, and Niioka also disclose rendering a second image file onto the computer (paragraph 89), wherein the second image file comprises at least one of a single solid color, multiple solid colors, and a graphical feature (paragraph 89); transferring the second image file onto the printer software (paragraph 89); printing the second image file onto a disc-shaped medium (paragraph 131); and
JP639 also discloses printing a second flipped image (printed pattern 7) onto a second clear substrate (transparent resin plate 6: Fig. 1), the second flipped image comprising at least one of a single solid color, multiple solid colors, and a graphical feature (paragraph 16); and
JP398 also discloses printing images (first printed layer 20) onto a second clear blank vinyl record (record 1: paragraph 10), and wherein the second clear blank vinyl record is pre-cut and measures 12 inches, 10 inches, or 7 inches in diameter (paragraphs 2, 10).
Therefore, Niioka’s modified method prints a second flipped graphical image onto a second clear blank vinyl record.
Regarding claim 5:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 4, and JP639 also disclose that the second image is the same as the first image (paragraphs 3, 16).
Regarding claim 6:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 4, and JP639 also disclose that the second image is different from the first image (paragraphs 3, 16).
Regarding claim 7:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 4, and JP639 also disclose a step of printing a solid white layer (white blocking layer 8) directly on top of the printed second image (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 7, and JP639 also disclose a step of applying adhesive (9) on top of the white layer of one or both clear blank substrates (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 4, and JP639 also disclose a step of pressing and adhering the first and the second clear blank substrates together (paragraph 17).
Regarding claims 11 and 19-20:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claims 4/18, and JP398 also disclose cutting one or more grooves (102) onto a blank surface (surface 10a) of the record (paragraph 11 & Fig. 1), and wherein the blank surface may be opposite of the printed surface of the clear blank vinyl record (Fig. 1); and
JP639 also disclose that one or more blank surfaces may be opposite of the printed surfaces of each individual clear blank vinyl record (Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 2 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niioka as modified by JP398 and JP639, as applied to claims 1/12 above, and further in view of US 2022/0048304 A1 (hereinafter, “Hofmann et al.”).
Regarding claims 2 and 13:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claims 1/12, but does not expressly disclose that the first image is rendered by artificial intelligence software.
However, Hofmann et al. disclose a method of rendering images by artificial intelligence software so as to enhance image quality (paragraph 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Niioka’s method to utilize artificial intelligence in rendering the first image, as taught by Hormann et al.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niioka as modified by JP398 and JP639, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2013/0299062 A1 (hereinafter, “Ng et al.”).
Regarding claim 10:
Niioka’s modified method comprises all the limitations of claim 9, but does not expressly disclose that pressing of the first and second clear blank vinyl records is performed with a lamination machine.
However, Ng et al. disclose a method of bonding first and second substrates (118, 120) using a lamination machine (100) that enables alignment of the substrates before bonding (paragraph 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to pone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the desired bonding of the first and second clear blank vinyl records using a lamination machine, as suggested by Ng et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Sato et al. (US 2022/0410584 A1) disclose a method of reverse printing on transparent vinyl substrates (paragraphs 25-28), in which an image (recorded matter 7) is printed on the transparent substrate (paragraph 28), and a solid white layer is formed overtop of the image (paragraph 28).
Usuda et al. (US 2010/0238211 A1) disclose a method of back-side printing on transparent substrates in which an image is flipped to be printed on the substrate (paragraph 79 & Figs. 6-7), and a solid white layer (“background image”) is formed overtop of the image (paragraphs 80-82).
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shelby L Fidler whose telephone number is (571)272-8455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am - 5pm 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.
SHELBY L. FIDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2853
/SHELBY L FIDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853