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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of CLAIMS 1-14 in the reply filed on 23 March 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 15-27 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected INVENTION, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of Japan Application No. 2022-058349 was received on 20 August 2024 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01 September 2024, 29 January 2025, 25 September 2025, 03 March 2026, and 25 May 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 05 July 2024 are accepted.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, 9-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugiyama et al. (JP 2009/155771 A), hereinafter Sugiyama, using a machine translation.
With regard to Claim 1, Sugiyama discloses a can printing system (¶0003) comprising:
a printing machine that performs printing on a surface of a metal can (¶0003);
a color guide that includes a plurality of color patches obtained by printing an ink color of the printing machine on a metal base material containing a metal identical to that of the metal can (¶0007-0010, test print proof prints sample pattern image on metal can); and
an inkjet printer that reproduces an ink color selected from the plurality of color patches and performs printing for calibration (¶0011-0014, adjustment step after comparison and proofreading between sample pattern and final product image desired).
With regard to Claim 9, Sugiyama further discloses wherein the plurality of color patches include color patches obtained by printing the ink color of the printing machine on the metal base material by a printer of a type identical to that of the printing machine (¶0003-0010).
With regard to Claim 10, Sugiyama further discloses wherein the plurality of color patches include a color patch obtained by printing the ink color of the printing machine on the metal base material using ink containing a pigment and/or dye identical to that of ink of the printing machine (¶0010-0014).
With regard to Claim 11, Sugiyama further discloses wherein the metal base material is aluminum, an aluminum alloy, steel or a tin plate (¶0002).
With regard to Claim 14, Sugiyama further discloses a can manufacturing system (¶0007) comprising the can printing system according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugiyama, in view of Lopez Alvarez (US PGPub 2022/0060606 A1).
With regard to Claim 2, Sugiyama does not explicitly disclose wherein when the plurality of color patches of the color guide are subjected to color measurement to acquire color coordinates of the plurality of color patches on a color space, a plurality of hue regions are obtained by segmenting the color space at predetermined hue angles, and a plurality of lightness/chroma regions are obtained by segmenting each of the plurality of hue regions at predetermined lightness widths and predetermined chroma widths, color coordinates of one or more color patches of the plurality of color patches are disposed in all of the plurality of hue regions, and color coordinates of one or more color patches of the plurality of color patches are disposed in predetermined lightness/chroma regions accounting for half or more of the plurality of lightness/chroma regions.
The secondary reference of Lopez Alvarez discloses wherein when the plurality of color patches of the color guide are subjected to color measurement to acquire color coordinates of the plurality of color patches on a color space (¶0020-0036), a plurality of hue regions are obtained by segmenting the color space at predetermined hue angles (¶0020-0036), and a plurality of lightness/chroma regions are obtained by segmenting each of the plurality of hue regions at predetermined lightness widths and predetermined chroma widths (¶0020-0036), color coordinates of one or more color patches of the plurality of color patches are disposed in all of the plurality of hue regions (¶0020-0036), and color coordinates of one or more color patches of the plurality of color patches are disposed in predetermined lightness/chroma regions accounting for half or more of the plurality of lightness/chroma regions (¶0020-0036).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the color measurement of Lopez Alvarez, with the can printing of Sugiyama, in order to provide a consistent color output for a given color input over time, from printing device to printing device, and from medium to medium, as taught by Lopez Alvarez (¶0019).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugiyama, in view of Lopez Alvarez, and further in view of Nakatani et al. (US PGPub 2013/0301065 A1), hereinafter Nakatani.
With regard to Claim 3, Sugiyama-Lopez Alvarez does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of hue regions include regions obtained by classifying values of a hue angle h° every 5° to 20°.
The tertiary reference of Nakatani discloses wherein the plurality of hue regions include regions obtained by classifying values of a hue angle h° every 5° to 20° (¶0097, hues measured at 10 degrees).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the hue degree of Nakatani, with the combination of Sugiyama-Lopez Alvarez, in order to match the perceived color when the hue angle changes or decreases, as taught by Nakatani (¶0097).
With regard to Claim 4, Sugiyama-Lopez Alvarez does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of hue regions include regions obtained by classifying values of a hue angle h° into 10° <= h°< 20°, 20° <= h°< 30°, 30° <= h°< 40°, 40° <= h°< 50°, 50° <= h°< 60°, 60° <= h°< 75°, 75° <= h°< 90°, 90° <= h°< 105°, 105° <= h°< 120°, 120° <= h°< 135°, 135° <= h°< 140°, 140° <= h°< 155°, 155° <= h°< 170°, 170° <= h°< 180°, 180° <= h°< 190°, 190° <= h°< 200°, 200° <= h°< 215°, 215° <= h°< 235°, 235° <= h°< 255°, 255° <= h°< 265°, 265° <= h°< 285°, 285° <= h°< 295°, 295° <= h°< 305°, 305° <= h°< 315°, 315° <= h°< 330°, 330° <= h°< 350°, 350° <= h°< 360°, and 360° <= h°< 10°.
The tertiary reference of Nakatani discloses wherein the plurality of hue regions include regions obtained by classifying values of a hue angle h° into 10° <= h°< 20°, 20° <= h°< 30°, 30° <= h°< 40°, 40° <= h°< 50°, 50° <= h°< 60°, 60° <= h°< 75°, 75° <= h°< 90°, 90° <= h°< 105°, 105° <= h°< 120°, 120° <= h°< 135°, 135° <= h°< 140°, 140° <= h°< 155°, 155° <= h°< 170°, 170° <= h°< 180°, 180° <= h°< 190°, 190° <= h°< 200°, 200° <= h°< 215°, 215° <= h°< 235°, 235° <= h°< 255°, 255° <= h°< 265°, 265° <= h°< 285°, 285° <= h°< 295°, 295° <= h°< 305°, 305° <= h°< 315°, 315° <= h°< 330°, 330° <= h°< 350°, 350° <= h°< 360°, and 360° <= h°< 10° (¶0097).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the hue angles of Nakatani, with the combination of Sugiyama-Lopez Alvarez, in order to match the perceived color when the hue angle changes or decreases, as taught by Nakatani (¶0097).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugiyama, in view of Ohno et al. (US PGPub 2024/0150062 A1), hereinafter Ohno.
With regard to Claim 13, Sugiyama does not explicitly disclose wherein the metal base material is a resin-coated metal plate.
The secondary reference of Ohno discloses wherein the metal base material is a resin-coated metal plate (Abstract; ¶0001).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the resin-coated metal of Ohno, with the metal plate of Sugiyama, in order that color unevenness of the bottle-shaped can may remain inconspicuous, and hence the design may be printed as intended, as taught by Ohno (¶0014).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 5 is that applicants claimed invention includes a can printing apparatus wherein the plurality of lightness/chroma regions include a plurality of lightness/chroma regions classified by a plurality of lightness classifications obtained by classifying values of lightness L* every 10 to 30 and a plurality of chroma classifications obtained by classifying values of chroma C* every 20 to 40 in each of the plurality of hue regions. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 6 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 6 is that applicants claimed invention includes a can printing apparatus wherein the plurality of lightness/chroma regions include nine lightness/chroma regions classified by lightness classifications obtained by classifying values of lightness L* into 28 <= L* < 45, 45 <= L* < 65, and 65 <= L* < 85 and chroma classifications obtained by classifying values of chroma C* into 0 <= C* < 30, 30 <= C* < 60, and 60 <= C* < 85 in each of the plurality of hue regions. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 7 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 7 is that applicants claimed invention includes a can printing apparatus wherein, in the color guide, the color coordinates of the one or more color patches of the plurality of color patches are arranged in an achromatic region obtained by classifying the color space into a region whose value of chroma C* is 2.0 or less, and the color coordinates of the one or more color patches of the plurality of color patches are arranged in a region other than the achromatic region in each of the plurality of hue regions. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 8 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 8 is that applicants claimed invention includes a can printing apparatus wherein, in the color guide, a minimum value of a color difference between each color patch included in the plurality of color patches and another color patch included in the plurality of color patches is 2 <= ΔE00 <= 9. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 13 is 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 reasons for allowability for Claim 13 is that applicants claimed invention includes a can printing apparatus wherein the metal base material is a can body part of a can, and the color patch is a cut piece of the can body part. It is this limitation, expressed in the claim combination not found, taught, or suggested in the prior art that makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT A. RICHMOND whose telephone number is (313)446-6547. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6:00 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, 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SCOTT A RICHMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights