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
2. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. These IDS have been considered.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawings
4. The examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 08/22/2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Election/Restrictions
5. Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 filed on 03/09/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US Pub. Nº 2013/0027470), in view of Ota (JP 08118656).
9. Regarding independent claim 1: Kato et al. disclosed an inkjet printing apparatus (see Fig. 10) comprising:
a base portion ([0032], line 1; also see Fig. 2B, reference 10);
an inner pipe disposed in the base portion and through which ink moves ([0033], line 1; also see Fig. 2B, reference 12); and
a nozzle extending from the inner pipe and discharging the ink ([0045], lines 1-6; also see Fig. 2B, reference 21),
wherein the nozzle includes a coating layer disposed on an inner side surface of the nozzle ([0051], lines 1-2 and [0027], line 1; also see Fig. 7, reference 201).
Kato et al. are silent about the coating layer including AlOF.
Ota disclosed a coating to be applied to a nozzle opening of an inkjet printing apparatus, wherein the coating layer includes AlOF (see the abstract; Aluminum fluoride naturally produces AlOF (Aluminum Fluoride Oxide) when it comes into contact with the oxygen in ambient air).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ota with those of Kato et al. by including AlOF in the coating layer in order to improve the accuracy of the inkjet head and prevent the formation of liquid pools around the nozzle opening as disclosed by Ota in paragraph [0022].
10. Regarding claim 2: The combination of Kato et al. and Ota disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 1, wherein the nozzle further includes an inclined surface extending from the inner pipe (Kato et al. Fig. 7, reference 21b), and a discharge surface extending from the inclined surface to a lower side of the nozzle (Kato et al. Fig. 7, reference 21a), and the coating layer is disposed on the discharge surface (Kato et al. see Fig. 7).
11. Regarding claim 3: The combination of Kato et al. and Ota disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 2, wherein the coating layer is spaced apart from the inclined surface and is in direct contact with the discharge surface (Kato et al. see Fig. 7; the coating layer is not formed on the inclined surface).
12. Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US Pub. Nº 2013/0027470), in view of Ota (JP 08118656) as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Uchiyama (US Pub. Nº 2010/0231647).
13. Regarding claim 4: The combination of Kato et al. and Ota disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 1.
The combination of Kato et al. and Ota is silent about wherein the coating layer includes a first coating layer disposed on an inner side surface of the nozzle, and a second coating layer disposed on the first coating layer.
Uchiyama disclosed in an inkjet printing apparatus (Fig. 1, reference 10), an ejection head (see Fig. 4), comprising an ejection nozzle (Fig. 8B, reference 102), and a coating on an inner side surface of the nozzle, wherein the coating layer includes a first coating layer disposed on an inner side surface of the nozzle (Fig. 8B, reference 110), and a second coating layer disposed on the first coating layer (Fig. 8B, reference 104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchiyama with those of the combination of Kato et al. and Ota by providing a protective coating under the liquid repellent coating in order to improve the reliability of the ejection head as disclosed by Uchiyama in paragraph [0100].
14. Regarding claims 5 and 6: The combination of Kato et al., Ota and Uchiyama disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 4, wherein the first coating layer includes at least one of a Group II element, a Group III element, a Group IV element, a Group V element, and a Group VI element, and wherein the first coating layer includes at least one of Cd, Se, Te, Zn, S, Mg, In, Ga, Sb, Al, and Pb (Uchiyama [0097], lines 1-2; the protective coating can be made of any metal including the above listed metals).
15. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US Pub. Nº 2013/0027470), in view of Ota (JP 08118656) as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Nishijima (US Pub. Nº 2006/0132541).
16. Regarding claim 12: The combination of Kato et al. and Ota disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 1.
The combination of Kato et al. and Ota is silent about wherein a thickness of the coating layer is in a range of about 50 nm to about 1000 nm.
Nishijima disclosed in an inkjet printing apparatus (see Fig. 7), an ejection head (Fig. 1, reference 1), comprising a base portion (Fig. 1, reference 31), an inner pipe (Fig. 1, reference 51) an ejection nozzle (Fig. 1, reference 211), and a coating on an inner side surface of the nozzle ([0046], line 3; also see Fig. 1, reference 7), wherein a thickness of the coating layer is in a range of about 50 nm to about 1000 nm ([0044], lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishijima with those of the combination of Kato et al. and Ota by selecting an appropriate thickness for the coating layer in order not to cause blockage of the nozzle as disclosed by Nishijima in paragraph [0021].
17. Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US Pub. Nº 2013/0027470), in view of Ota (JP 08118656) as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Uchiyama (US Pub. Nº 2010/0231647) as applied to claims 4-6 above, and further in view of Nishijima (US Pub. Nº 2006/0132541).
18. Regarding claims 7 and 9: The combination of Kato et al., Ota and Uchiyama disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 4.
The combination of Kato et al., Ota and Uchiyama is silent about wherein a thickness of the first coating layer is in a range of about 10 nm to about 100 nm, and wherein a thickness of the second coating layer is in a range of about 40 nm to about 900 nm.
However, Uchiyama disclosed a coating on an inner side surface of a nozzle comprising a first coating layer and a second coating layer; furthermore, Nishijima disclosed a coating on an inner side surface of a nozzle ([0046], line 3; also see Fig. 1, reference 7), wherein a thickness of the coating layer is in a range of about 50 nm to about 1000 nm ([0044], lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nishijima with those of Uchiyama by selecting an appropriate thickness for the first coating layer and the second coating layer in order not to cause blockage of the nozzle as disclosed by Nishijima in paragraph [0021].
19. Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US Pub. Nº 2013/0027470), in view of Ota (JP 08118656) as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Uchiyama (US Pub. Nº 2010/0231647) as applied to claims 4-6 above, and further in view of Fujii et al. (US Pub. Nº 2010/0053269).
20. Regarding claim 10: The combination of Kato et al., Ota and Uchiyama disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 4.
The combination of Kato et al., Ota and Uchiyama is silent about further comprising: a third coating layer disposed on the second coating layer, wherein the third coating layer includes a metal oxide.
Fujii et al. disclosed in an inkjet printing apparatus (Fig. 33, reference 2000), an ejection head (Fig. 2, reference 1000), comprising an ejection nozzle (Fig. 2, reference 4), and a coating on an inner side surface of the nozzle, wherein the coating layer includes a first coating layer disposed on an inner side surface of the nozzle (Fig. 21, reference 334), a second coating layer disposed on the first coating layer (Fig. 21, reference 333) and a third coating layer disposed on the second coating layer (Fig. 21, reference 332), wherein the third coating layer includes a metal oxide ([0130], lines 1-2; silicone oxide).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Fujii et al. with those of the combination of Kato et al., Ota and Uchiyama by adding a third coating layer in order to increase the durability of the liquid repellent coating as disclosed by Fujii et al. in paragraph [0155].
21. Regarding claim 11: The combination of Kato et al., Ota, Uchiyama and Fujii et al. disclosed the inkjet printing apparatus of claim 10, wherein a thickness of the third coating layer is in a range of about 100 nm to about 500 nm (Fujii et al. [0084], lines 1-2).
Allowable Subject Matter
22. 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.
23. Regarding claim 8: The prior art is silent about forming a coating layer on an inner side surface of a nozzle of an inkjet head, said coating layer comprising a first coating layer made of a metal selected from Cd, Se, Te, Zn, S, Mg, In, Ga, Sb, Al, and Pb, that is disposed on an inner side of the surface of the nozzle and comprising a second coating layer including Aluminum Fluoride Oxide (AlOF) that is disposed on the first coating layer.
Conclusion
24. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAOVI M. AMEH whose telephone number is (571)272-4578. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
25. 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.
26. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RICARDO MAGALLANES can be reached at (571)272-5960. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
27. 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.
/YAOVI M AMEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights