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 05 August 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claim recites both the nozzle and the pressure chamber being formed in a single substrate. This does not correspond to the disclosure and corresponding drawings of the Application, in which the nozzle 2 is formed in nozzle forming portion 111, while the pressure chamber 4 is formed in channel substrate 100. See figures 3 and 11-12, and paragraphs 0041 and 0045.
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 1-10 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "ink" in line 5, making the claim unclear since the rest of the claim (as well as its dependent claims) refers to a ‘liquid’ to be discharged by the nozzle, and raising the question as to whether there are two different liquids (i.e., ‘ink’ and ‘liquid’) contained in the discharge head and discharged by the nozzles.
Claims 2-10 are rejected the same way since they depend on claim 1.
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 (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 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.
(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.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2017/0072692 – hereinafter Chen; corresponding to WO 2015/147804, listed on the IDS.)
Regarding claim 1,
Chen discloses a liquid discharge head [114 in figs. 1-3] comprising:
a nozzle plate [210 in figs. 2-3] having nozzles [116 in figs. 1-3; including channel 242 that ends at the nozzle orifice] from each of which a liquid is to be discharged [paragraphs 0019 and 0029];
a substrate [206 in figs. 2-3] including a pressure chamber [212 in figs. 2-3] communicating with the nozzle [as seen in figs. 2-3; paragraphs 0023-0027];
an electromechanical converter [224 in figs. 2-3] in the nozzle plate, the electromechanical converter configured to apply pressure to ink in the pressure chamber to discharge the liquid from the nozzle [paragraphs 0024 and 0027]; and
a lyophilic surface layer [260 in figs. 2-3] having lyophilicity with the liquid, on an inner peripheral surface of each of the nozzle and the pressure chamber [as seen in figs. 2-3; paragraphs 0032-0033 and 0036; “the passivation layer 260 also improves surface wetting” (paragraph 0036); also note that layer 260 may be made out of HfO2, which is one of the options listed as possible materials included in the lyophilic surface layer.]
Regarding claim 2,
Chen further discloses wherein: the lyophilic surface layer is hydrophilic [paragraphs 0033 and 0036.]
Regarding claim 3,
Chen further discloses wherein: the lyophilic surface layer is a protective layer to prevent erosion of the inner peripheral surfaces of each of the nozzle and the pressure chamber by the liquid [as seen in figs. 2-3; paragraphs 0033-0038.]
Regarding claim 4,
Chen further discloses wherein the lyophilic surface layer includes metal of at least one of tantalum (Ta), niobium (Nb), titanium (Ti), hafnium (Hf) [paragraph 0033; hafnium oxide contains hafnium, which is a metal], zirconium (Zr), or tungsten (W) [only one option needed for the limitation to be met.]
Regarding claim 5,
Chen further discloses wherein the lyophilic surface layer includes metal oxide of at least one of tantalum (Ta), niobium (Nb), titanium (Ti), hafnium (Hf) [paragraph 0033], zirconium (Zr), or tungsten (W) [only one option needed for the limitation to be met.]
Regarding claim 7,
Chen further discloses the liquid discharge head further comprising;
a liquid repellent film [211 in figs. 2-3] having liquid repellency against the liquid [paragraph 0023],
wherein:
the nozzle plate has a nozzle surface facing outside the liquid discharge head [as seen in figs. 2-3], and
the liquid repellent film is on the nozzle surface of the nozzle plate [as seen in figs. 2-3.]
Regarding claim 8,
Chen further discloses wherein: the electromechanical converter surrounds the nozzle [as seen in figs. 2-3.]
Regarding claim 9,
Chen further discloses wherein:
the nozzle plate has a nozzle surface [as seen in figs. 2-3], and
the lyophilic surface layer is on an inner surface of the nozzle plate opposite to the nozzle surface [as seen in figs. 2-3; paragraph 0023.]
Regarding claim 10,
Chen further discloses a liquid discharge apparatus [100 in fig. 1], comprising:
the liquid discharge head according to claim 1 [see Rejection above]; and
at least one of:
a head tank [108 in fig.1 / 500 in fig. 5] attached to the liquid discharge head, the head tank to accommodate the liquid to be supplied to the liquid discharge head [paragraphs 0019 and 0041];
a carriage mounting the liquid discharge head and the head tank [not shown but mentioned in paragraphs 0018 and 0021];
a supplier to supply the liquid to the head tank [through port 506 in fig. 5; the supplier is not shown but mentioned in paragraph 0042];
a maintainer to maintain the liquid discharge head [note that not all options are needed for the limitation to be met; also note that a maintenance station/component is well-known in the art]; or
a main scan mover [106 in fig. 1] to move the carriage in a main scanning direction [paragraphs 0019 and 0021.]
Regarding claim 11,
Chen further discloses a method for manufacturing a liquid discharge head, the method comprising:
laminating a diaphragm [240 in figs. 2-3] on a substrate [206 in figs. 2-3];
forming an electromechanical converter [224 in figs. 2-3] on the diaphragm [as seen in figs. 2-3; paragraphs 0024 and 0027];
forming a nozzle [116 in figs. 1-3; including channel 242 that ends at the nozzle orifice] in the substrate [210; as seen in figs. 2-3; see 112 Rejection above; also note that there is an opening in substrate 206 where the channel 242 for the nozzle begins];
forming a pressure chamber [212 in figs. 2-3] in the substrate [206 in figs. 2-3], the pressure chamber communicating with the nozzle [paragraphs 0023-0027; figs. 2-3]; and
forming a lyophilic surface layer [260 in figs. 2-3] having lyophilicity with the liquid, on an inner peripheral surface of each of the pressure chamber and the nozzle [as seen in figs. 2-3; paragraphs 0032-0033 and 0036; “the passivation layer 260 also improves surface wetting” (paragraph 0036); also note that layer 260 may be made out of HfO2, which is one of the options listed as possible materials included in the lyophilic surface layer.]
Regarding claim 14,
Chen further discloses the method further comprising:
forming a liquid repellent film [211 in figs. 2-3] having liquid repellency against the liquid [paragraph 0023] on a nozzle surface of the substrate opposite to the inner peripheral surface of the pressure chamber [as seen in figs. 2-3.]
Regarding claim 15,
Chen further discloses the method further comprising:
removing the liquid repellent film adhered to the lyophilic surface layer [it is implicit and well-known that if the liquid repellent adhering to the lyophilic surface, will be removed so that is can perform its intended functions.]
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, 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen.
Regarding claim 6,
Chen discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the lyophilic surface layer includes a metal oxide of hafnium (Hf) [paragraph 0033; only one of the options is needed for the limitation to be met.]
Chen fails to expressly disclose the lyophilic surface layer comprises a mixed material further including a silicon oxide.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use a mixed material including a silicon oxide for the lyophilic surface layer, since it has been held to be within the ordinary skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). One would have been motivated to use a mixed material including a silicon oxide for the purpose of achieving superior corrosion resistance and improved thermal stability.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Hayashi (US 2016/0023465.)
Regarding claims 12 and 13,
Chen further discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above but fails to expressly disclose wherein:
the forming the lyophilic surface forms the lyophilic surface layer by chemical vapor deposition (claim 12); and
the forming the pressure chamber forms the pressure chamber by dry etching (claim 13.)
However, Hayashi discloses a liquid discharge head including a nozzle substrate [300 in fig. 9C]; nozzles [301 in fig. 9C] disposed on the nozzle substrate; a pressure chamber [104 in fig. 9C] that communicates with the nozzles and that is formed by dry etching [paragraph 0058]; a diaphragm [102 in fig. 13] forming one wall of the pressurized liquid chamber; an electromechanical transducer element [101 in fig. 9C] for discharging; and a silicon oxide film formed by plasma CVD method as a passivation film [112 in fig. 8C; paragraph 0056.]
Therefore, 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 Chen invention to include means for forming the lyophilic surface layer by chemical vapor deposition and the pressure chamber by dry etching as taught by Hayashi for the purpose of achieving superior resistance to corrosion from ink and high-temperature operating conditions (via CVD) and maintaining high precision without damaging adjacent, sensitive materials in the printhead structure (via dry etching.)
Communication with the USPTO
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANNELLE M LEBRON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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 X 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.
/JANNELLE M LEBRON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853