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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers 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.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoggett et al. (US 20190345350 A1; herein referred to as “Hoggett”) in view of Van Hout (US 20170275481 A1).
Hoggett (Table 3; annotations added) teaches a radiation-curable ink (i.e., “radically curable” ink) composition of the following composition, which will be referred to throughout the following section:
PNG
media_image1.png
704
489
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 1, Hoggett (Table 3) teaches the following:
A radiation-curable ink composition (i.e., a “radically curable” ink), wherein the radiation-curable ink composition comprises at least one radiation-curable component (i.e., “EBECRYL 811” and “EBECRYL 1606”; Hoggett: Table 3).
The following factual reference is provided to further clarify the applicability of the specified EBECRYL products: Allnex’s UV/EB Curable Resins Product Guide (“Factual Reference 1”; see fact sheet included in the Notice of References Cited) teaches that EBECRYL products 811 (p. 38) and 1606 (p. 35) are both radiation curable components (i.e., “UV/EB curable resins”; p. 1). Regarding this and other cited factual references, applicant is advised to MPEP 2124.
the at least one radiation-curable component (i.e., “EBECRYL 811” and “EBECRYL 1606”) being present in an amount of 55 weight percent (“wt%”) or more, based on the total weight of the radiation-curable ink composition.
In the ink composition specified in Hoggett (Table 3), these specified radiation curable components total to 63.91 wt% of the total ink composition (i.e., ≥55 wt%).
wherein the radiation-curable ink composition further comprises a polyalkylene wax (i.e., “SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 (polyethylene wax)”), wherein the polyalkylene wax has a molecular weight of 1000 g/mole or less.
Polyethylene wax is one embodiment of a polyalkylene wax. Moreover, SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 has a molecular weight within the range of 500-1000 g/mol and therefore is within the claimed range of 1000 g/mol or less. The following factual references are provided to further clarify this molecular weight property of SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1:
Shamrock Technologies’ product technical data sheet for S-394-N1 Synthetic/FT Wax (“Factual Reference 2”; see fact sheet included in the Notice of References Cited), teaches that “SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 (polyethylene wax)” is a Fischer-Trope (“FT”) wax.
Shamrock Technologies’ product website page “About Micronized Wax Powder” (“Factual Reference 3”; see fact sheet included in the Notice of References Cited), teaches that Shamrock Technologies’ Fischer-Trope (“FT”) wax type products are within the molecular weight (“MW”) range of 500-1000 g/mol.
Hoggett does not explicitly disclose a radiation-curable ink composition, wherein the radiation-curable ink composition comprises a gelling agent.
However, Hoggett teaches “inert resins…used to adjust the viscosity of the radically curable offset or letterpress printing ink”; Hoggett: [0055]). Hoggett also teaches a specific radiation-curable ink composition which includes a radiation-curable component, a polyalkylene wax, and “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol (Hoggett: Table 3).
Furthermore, Van Hout teaches an ink composition of a “radiation-curable inkjet ink comprising a radiation curable component…further comprising a first and a second ester compound” (Van Hout: [0006]). Van Hout expands on this, teaching “the first ester compound is a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol. Ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation- curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0006] and [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that an inert resin used to adjust the viscosity of an ink could be construed as a “gelling” agent. Hoggett teaches the benefits of using inert resins as gelling agent (i.e., to adjust the viscosity) in radiation-curable ink, including “to lower the glass transition temperature of an ink layer prepared with the radically curable offset or letterpress printing ink described herein, or to increase the adhesion of an ink layer prepared with the radically curable offset or letterpress printing ink described herein” (Hoggett: [0055]). In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol, is a gelling agent used in radiation-curable inkjet ink. Van Hout teaches that “ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0051]). Within the radiation-curable ink composition taught by Hoggett, the gelling agent (i.e., “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer” aka an ester compound of pentaerythritol), is present in an amount of 3 wt% based on the total amount of the radiation-curable ink composition, which is within the claimed range (Hoggett: Table 3). Including a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition is beneficial because it enhances print quality, as Van Hout teaches in the following quote: “[t]he gelling behavior (e.g. viscosity of the droplet and speed of gelling) influences the behavior of the ink droplets on the recording medium. The behavior of the droplets may influence the visual appearance of the print” (Van Hout: [0003]).
With respect to Claim 2, Hoggett teaches the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1 (see discussion of Claim 1). Hoggett also teaches a specific radiation-curable ink composition which includes a radiation-curable component, a polyalkylene wax, and “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol (Hoggett: Table 3).
Hoggett is silent on the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1, wherein the gelling agent is a fatty acid ester.
Van Hout teaches an ink composition of a “radiation-curable inkjet ink comprising a radiation curable component…further comprising a first and a second ester compound” (Van Hout: [0006]). Van Hout expands on this, teaching “the first ester compound is a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol. Ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ink composition taught in Hoggett by substituting the “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester of pentaerythritol, with a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol (Van Hout: [0051]). Van Hout teaches that “ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0051]). Including a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition is beneficial because it enhances print quality, as Van Hout teaches in the following quote: “[t]he gelling behavior (e.g. viscosity of the droplet and speed of gelling) influences the behavior of the ink droplets on the recording medium. The behavior of the droplets may influence the visual appearance of the print” (Van Hout: [0003]).
With respect to Claim 3, Hoggett teaches the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1 (see discussion of Claim 1). Hoggett also teaches a specific radiation-curable ink composition which includes a radiation-curable component, a polyalkylene wax, and “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol (Hoggett: Table 3).
Hoggett is silent on the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 2, wherein the gelling agent is a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol.
Van Hout teaches an ink composition of a “radiation-curable inkjet ink comprising a radiation curable component…further comprising a first and a second ester compound” (Van Hout: [0006]). Van Hout expands on this, teaching “the first ester compound is a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol. Ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ink composition taught in Hoggett by substituting the “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol, with a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol (Van Hout: [0051]). Van Hout teaches that “ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0051]). Including a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition is beneficial because it enhances print quality, as Van Hout teaches in the following quote: “[t]he gelling behavior (e.g. viscosity of the droplet and speed of gelling) influences the behavior of the ink droplets on the recording medium. The behavior of the droplets may influence the visual appearance of the print” (Van Hout: [0003]).
With respect to Claim 4, Hoggett teaches the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1 (see discussion of Claim 1). Hoggett also teaches a specific radiation-curable ink composition which includes a radiation-curable component, a polyalkylene wax, and “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol (Hoggett: Table 3). Hoggett teaches the ester compound of pentaerythritol is 3 wt% of the total ink composition (Table 3).
Hoggett is silent on the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1, wherein the gelling agent is present in an amount of from 0.1 wt% to 15 wt% based on the total amount of the radiation-curable ink composition.
Van Hout teaches an ink composition of a “radiation-curable inkjet ink comprising a radiation curable component…further comprising a first and a second ester compound” (Van Hout: [0006]). Van Hout expands on this, teaching “the first ester compound is a fatty acid ester of pentaerythritol. Ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation- curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0006] and [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”, an ester compound of pentaerythritol, is a gelling agent used in radiation-curable inkjet ink. Van Hout teaches that “ester compounds of pentaerythritol may be suitable used as a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition” (Van Hout: [0051]). Within the radiation-curable ink composition taught by Hoggett, the gelling agent (i.e., “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer” aka an ester compound of pentaerythritol), is present in an amount of 3 wt% based on the total amount of the radiation-curable ink composition, which is within the claimed range (Hoggett: Table 3). Including a gelling agent in a radiation-curable ink composition is beneficial because it enhances print quality, as Van Hout teaches in the following quote: “[t]he gelling behavior (e.g. viscosity of the droplet and speed of gelling) influences the behavior of the ink droplets on the recording medium. The behavior of the droplets may influence the visual appearance of the print” (Van Hout: [0003]).
With respect to Claim 5, Hoggett (Table 3) teaches the following about the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1: wherein the polyalkylene wax (i.e., “SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 (polyethylene wax)”) is present in an amount of from 0.01 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total amount of the radiation-curable ink composition. Polyethylene wax is one embodiment of a polyalkylene wax. In the ink composition specified in Hoggett (Table 3), the polyalkylene wax (i.e., “SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 (polyethylene wax)”) is 0.5 wt% of the total ink composition, which is within the claimed range.
With respect to Claim 6, Hoggett (Table 3 and paragraph [0090]) teaches a method for preparing a radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1, the method comprising of the steps:
providing at least one radiation curable component (i.e., “EBECRYL 811” and “EBECRYL 1606”), the at least one radiation-curable component being present in an amount of 55 wt% or more, based on the total weight of the radiation-curable ink composition (i.e., 63.91 wt% ≥ 55 wt%);
providing a gelling agent (i.e., “MIRAMER M4004 (pentaerythritol ethoxylated tetraacrylate monomer)”;
providing a polyalkylene wax (i.e., “SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 (polyethylene wax)”) the polyalkylene wax having a molecular weight of 1000 g/mole or less. Polyethylene wax is one embodiment of a polyalkylene wax. Moreover, SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 has a molecular weight within the range of 500-1000 g/mol and therefore is within the claimed range of 1000 g/mol or less. The following factual references are provided to further clarify this molecular weight property of SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1:
Shamrock Technologies’ product technical data sheet for S-394-N1 Synthetic/FT Wax (“Factual Reference 2”; see fact sheet included in the Notice of References Cited), teaches that “SHAMROCK WAX S394 N1 (polyethylene wax)” is a Fischer-Trope (“FT”) wax.
Shamrock Technologies’ product website page “About Micronized Wax Powder” (“Factual Reference 3”; see fact sheet included in the Notice of References Cited), teaches that Shamrock Technologies’ Fischer-Trope (“FT”) wax type products are within the molecular weight (“MW”) range of 500-1000 g/mol.
mixing the radiation curable component, the gelling agent and the polyalkylene wax.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Hout et al. (US 20170283640 A1; herein referred to as “Van Hout et al.”) in view of Hoggett, and further in view Van Hout.
With respect to Claim 7, Van Hout et al. teaches a method for applying an image onto a recording medium (Van Hout et al.: [0040]-[0044]), the method comprising the steps of:
jetting droplets of a radiation-curable ink composition onto the recording medium (Van Hout et al.: [0041]);
curing the radiation-curable ink composition by irradiating the ink composition using UV radiation (Van Hout et al.: [0042]).
Van Hout et al. notes that the radiation curable ink composition (Van Hout et al.: [0005]-[0033]) includes a radiation-curable component (Van Hout et al.: [0007]) and gelling agent (i.e., “gellant”; Van Hout et al.: [0014]-[0015]).
Van Hout et al. is silent on the radiation-curable ink composition being the composition specified in Claim 1 and instead applies the method to the radiation-curable ink composition specified in Van Hout et al. (Van Hout et al.: [0005]-[0033]).
Hoggett in view of Van Hout teaches the radiation-curable ink composition according to Claim 1 (which notably includes a radiation-curable component and a gelling agent).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Van Hout et al. by substituting the radiation-curable ink composition taught in Van Hout et al. with the one taught in Hoggett. The composition specified in Hoggett (Table 3), which shares similarities to the one taught in Van Hout et al. (i.e., the use of a radiation-curable component and a gelling agent), is designed to cure at low levels of radiation, subsequently requiring less energy to cure (Hoggett: [0014-0015]). Operating the method taught in Van Hout et al. with less energy is a motivation to substitute the radiation-curable ink composition taught in Van Hout et al. with the composition taught in Hoggett.
With respect to Claim 8, Van Hout et al. teaches the method according to Claim 7 (which is taught by Van Hout et al. in view of Hoggett, further in view of Van Hout), wherein a time interval between jetting droplets of the radiation-curable ink composition and curing the radiation-curable ink composition is at least 30 seconds ([0067]). Van Hout et al. teaches the following method: “Image formation samples were prepared by applying a droplet of ink onto a recording medium. 60 Seconds after the droplet was applied onto the recording medium, the droplet was cured by irradiating with a LED emitting 395 nm radiation. The droplet was irradiated until it was fully cured” (emphasis added). 60 seconds is within the claimed time interval of at least 30 seconds.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHLOMIT CHELST whose telephone number is (571)272-0832. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 8:30 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Ricardo Magallanes, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-5960. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/SHLOMIT CHELST/ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/ Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853