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
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-1003944 (henceforth JP ‘944) in view of Kanda et al. (US Patent 5,178,460).
JP ‘944 teaches a method for making a toner comprising aggregating particles including binder resin and release agent particles in a dispersion to form aggregated particles and fusing the aggregated particles by heating the aggregated particles to a temperature above the glass transition temperature of the binder resin. This process is taught to be performed in an agitation tank provided with an agitation blade (see the “[Polymerization method in which binder resin particles are aggregated or fused in an aqueous medium]” and “<Release agent>” sections of the provided translation). The glass transition temperature is taught to be within the range of 35 to 80 °C, preferably 45 to 65 °C (see the “<Amorphous resin>” section of the provided translation). However, JP ‘944 does not teach diameter of the agitation blade, the circumferential speed of the agitation blade or the density of the dispersion.
Kanda teaches a continuous mixing device for continuously mixing powder, such as a colorant and a binder resin, to form toner particles. The mixing device is taught to comprise a casing having a mixing chamber inside of the device as well as a rotary shaft with a rotatable stirring blade attached thereto (agitation blade) within said casing (Abstract). The stirring blades may a have a diameter of 100 cm, a circumferential speed of 20 to 100 m/sec and a powder concentration of 0.1 kg/m3 to 20 kg/m3 (Col. 5 ln. 57-68). The mixer operated within these parameters is taught to produce a uniform and sufficient mixed state and dispersed state without occurrence of poor mixing (Col. 6 ln. 15-22). Additionally, said mixer operated under these conditions is taught to allow for short mixing time so as to improve productivity (Col. 6 ln. 23-26). The stirring blade is further taught to be a propeller-type agitating blade (see Figure 2B). As such, the Applicant’s recited method is known in the prior art as evidenced by the disclosure of JP ‘944 cited above. Furthermore, the parameters for performing the fusing step are known for mixers for producing toner particles in the prior art as evidenced by the disclosure of Kanda cited above. While Kanda does teach a slightly smaller diameter of the agitating blade (100 cm or 0.1 m compared with the Applicant’s 0.1 m) the MPEP instructs that changes in size or relative dimensions of an article are prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.04 IV A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing date of the instant application to have operated the agitation tank of JP ‘944 with the parameters taught by Kanda et al. or to have utilized the mixer of Kanda et al. as the agitation tank in method of JP ‘944 and to have optimized the known parameters within the ranges taught by JP ‘944 and Kanda et al. through routine experimentation in order to improve the uniform dispersion of ingredients to provide desired aggregation and fusing of the toner constituents in order to form toner particles in a fast and efficient manner. Such optimization would read on the ranges recited by the Applicant in pending claims 1-4.
JP ‘944 further teaches that the binder resin should comprise a crystalline polyester resin in an amount of 3 to 60 percent by mass with respect to the total amount of the binder resin (see the “<Crystalline resin>” section of the provided translation).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-1003944 (henceforth JP ‘944) in view of Kanda et al. (US Patent 5,178,460) as applied to claims 1-6 and 8 above, and further in view of WO 2019/245977 (henceforth WO ‘977).
The complete discussions of JP ‘944 and Kanda above are included herein. JP ‘944 does not teach a suitable melting point for the release agent in the toner particles.
WO ‘977 teaches a toner comprising a binder resin and a release agent. Additionally, the release agent is taught to have a melting point of less than 130 °C, preferably less than 100 °C in order to keep a low fixing/fusing temperature of the toner (p. 5 ln. 9-21). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing date of the instant application to have operated the agitation tank of JP ‘944 with the parameters taught by Kanda et al. or to have utilized the mixer of Kanda et al. as the agitation tank in method of JP ‘944 and to have optimized the known parameters within the ranges taught by JP ‘944 and Kanda et al. through routine experimentation in order to improve the uniform dispersion of ingredients to provide desired aggregation and fusing of the toner constituents in order to form toner particles in a fast and efficient manner and to have utilized release agents with a melting temperature of less than 100 °C as taught by WO ‘977 in the toner of JP ‘944.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER L VAJDA whose telephone number is (571)272-7150. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00 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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571)270-3149. 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.
/PETER L VAJDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737 09/23/2026
Prosecution Insights