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
2. 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
3. The examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 10/03/2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed on 08/10/2026 with respect to the rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remarks, Applicant argued that Osaki et al. failed to disclose “wherein a distance, measured in an ejection direction, from a surface of the pressure chamber on which the energy-generating element is provided to the ejection port is 13 um or more and 16 um or less” as currently disclosed in independent claim 1. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Osaki et al. disclosed in paragraph [0065] that the distance H, which is the distance, measured in an ejection direction, from a surface of the pressure chamber on which the energy-generating element is provided to the ejection port is 3 to 30 μm (which includes the range 13 to 16 μm).
Accordingly, the combination of prior arts relied upon in the previous rejection still renders obvious the limitations of independent claim 1 as currently amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-6, 8-12 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osaki et al. (US Pub. Nº 2020/0108605), in view of Katsuragi et al. (US Pub. Nº 2016/0177116).
8. Regarding independent claim 1: Osaki et al. disclosed a liquid ejection apparatus ([0039], lines 1-3; also see Fig. 19, reference 1000) ejecting an ink to record an image ([0001], lines 1-2) on a record medium (Fig. 19, reference 2),
wherein the liquid ejection apparatus includes an element substrate ([0060], line 3; also see Fig. 27C, reference 11) including:
a plurality of individual channels (Fig. 27C, reference 24) having an ejection port configured to eject the liquid (Fig. 27C, reference 13), a pressure chamber configured to supply the liquid to the ejection port ([0033], line 1; also see Fig. 27B, reference 23), and an energy-generating element configured to generate energy to eject the liquid ([0057], lines 1-2; also see Fig. 27C, reference 15);
an upstream channel configured to supply the liquid to the plurality of individual channels ([0057], lines 13-14; also see Fig. 27C, reference 18); and
a downstream channel for outflow of the liquid from the plurality of individual channels ([0057], lines 14-15; also see Fig. 27C, reference 19),
wherein the ejection port has a protrusion protruding toward a center of the ejection port (Fig. 25A, the protrusion protruding toward a center portion of the ejection port 13; also see Fig. 27C, reference 13 for clarifications), and
wherein a distance, measured in an ejection direction, from a surface of the pressure chamber on which the energy-generating element is provided to the ejection port is 13 um or more and 16 um or less ([0065], line 7; also see Fig. 27B, reference H).
Osaki et al. are silent about the liquid ejection apparatus ejecting an aqueous ink and an aqueous reaction liquid containing a reactant that reacts with the aqueous ink.
Katsuragi et al. disclosed a liquid ejection apparatus ([0248], line 1; also see Fig. 1, reference 1), ejecting an aqueous ink ([0248], lines 1-2) and an aqueous reaction liquid containing a reactant that reacts with the aqueous ink ([0248], line 2 and [0124], 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 Katsuragi et al. with those of Osaki et al. by jetting an aqueous reaction liquid in addition to the aqueous ink in order to improve the quality of the printed image as disclosed by Katsuragi et al. in paragraph [0124].
9. Regarding claim 2: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the liquid ejection port includes a plurality of the protrusions (Osaki et al. Fig. 25A, the ejection port 13 includes at least two protrusions).
10. Regarding claim 3: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 2, wherein the liquid ejection port has two of the protrusions (Osaki et al. Fig. 25A, the ejection port 13 includes two protrusions).
11. Regarding claim 4: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 2, wherein an interval between the protrusions is 2.0 µm or more and 5.0 µm or less (Osaki et al. [0065], lines 7-8 disclosed that the ejection port 13 has a width W of 6 to 30 µm. From the ratio of the interval between the protrusions to the width of the ejection port, it can be deduced that the interval between the protrusions is approximately 2.0 µm or more and 5.0 µm or less when W is approximately 30 µm).
12. Regarding claim 5: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 3, wherein the ejection port has an opening area of 100 µm2 or more (Osaki et al. [0065], lines 7-8; a width diameter W of 6 to 30 µm yields an opening area of 28.26 µm2 to 706.5 µm2 (for values of 100 µm2 to 706.5 µm2)).
13. Regarding claim 6: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 3, wherein the two protrusions are located on a straight line passing through the center and are provided on both sides of the center (Osaki et al. see Fig. 25A), and the straight line forms an angle of 45 degrees or less with a channel axis connecting the upstream channel and the downstream channel (Osaki et al. see Figs. 25A and 27C; the straight line forms 0 degrees (45 degrees or less) with a channel axis connecting the upstream channel and the downstream channel).
14. Regarding claim 8: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the aqueous ink and the aqueous reaction liquid have an ejection speed of 12 m/s or less from the ejection port (Katsuragi et al. [0238], lines 1-2).
15. Regarding claim 9: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, further comprising circulating the aqueous ink or the aqueous reaction liquid in the pressure chamber between the pressure chamber and an outside of the pressure chamber (Osaki et al. [0057], lines 13-15; also see Fig. 27C, references 18 and 19 are respective supply and recovery paths for circulating the ink or reaction liquid between the pressure chamber and an outside of the pressure chamber).
16. Regarding claim 10: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the aqueous ink or the aqueous reaction liquid in the pressure chamber is circulated between the pressure chamber and an outside of the element substrate (Osaki et al. [0057], lines 13-15; also see Fig. 27C, references 18 and 19 are respective supply and recovery paths for circulating the ink or reaction liquid between the pressure chamber and an outside of the pressure chamber).
17. Regarding claim 11: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid includes ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid contains a resin (Katsuragi et al. [0011], lines 2-3).
18. Regarding claim 12: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid includes ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid with a viscosity of 0.002 Pa·s or more and 0.010 Pa·s or less at 25°C (Osaki et al. [0065], lines 8-9).
19. Regarding claim 14: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the ejecting the aqueous ink includes ejecting the aqueous ink with a solid content of 10% by weight or more and 30% by weight or less (Katsuragi et al. [0197], lines 1-2).
20. Regarding claim 15: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the ejecting the aqueous ink includes ejecting the aqueous ink containing titanium oxide (Katsuragi et al. [0046], lines 1-3).
21. Regarding claim 16: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the aqueous ink is ejected from a first liquid ejection head (Katsuragi et al. [0248], lines 1-2; also see Fig. 1, reference 110), and wherein the aqueous reaction liquid is ejected from a second liquid ejection head (Katsuragi et al. [0248], line 2).
22. Regarding claim 17: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the aqueous ink and the aqueous reaction liquid are ejected from a liquid ejection head (Katsuragi et al. [0248], lines 1-2).
23. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osaki et al. (US Pub. Nº 2020/0108605), in view of Katsuragi et al. (US Pub. Nº 2016/0177116) as applied to claims 1-6, 8-12 and 14-17 above, and further in view of Nishimura (US Pub. Nº 2011/0242199).
24. Regarding claim 13: The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. disclosed the liquid ejection apparatus according to Claim 1.
The combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. is silent about wherein the ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid includes ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid with a surface tension of 60 mN/m or less at 25°C.
Nishimura disclosed a liquid ejection apparatus ([0219], line 1) ejecting an aqueous ink ([0200], line 1), and an aqueous reaction liquid that reacts with the aqueous ink ([0149], line 1), wherein the ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid includes ejecting the aqueous reaction liquid with a surface tension of 60 mN/m or less at 25°C ([0153], 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 Nishimura with those of the combination of Osaki et al. and Katsuragi et al. by using a reaction liquid having an appropriate surface tension in order to achieve the required aggregation rate of the ink composition as disclosed by Nishimura in paragraph [0153].
Conclusion
25. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
26. A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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