DETAILED ACTION
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(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (2024/0116289) in view of Franke (6,521,327) and Kashiwazaki et al. (2002/0041317) and Koike et al. (2014/0220319).
Regarding claim 1, Takeuchi teaches a transfer recording method, comprising:
a first layer forming step (fig. 7, layer Im) of discharging an image forming ink from an ink jet head onto a transfer medium having a release layer to form a first layer ([0166]);
a second layer forming step (fig. 7, layer A) of discharging an adhesive ink from the ink jet head to form a second layer so as to be superimposed on the first layer ([0009]); and
a transfer step of transferring the first layer and the second layer onto fabric by pressing a surface of the transfer medium on which the first layer and the second layer are formed in a state where the surface faces the fabric, wherein the image forming ink includes a color material and water ([0063]-[0064], [0070]),
the adhesive ink includes a thermoplastic resin and water ([0131], Superflex 300, softening point 99°C),
Takeuchi does not teach wherein the transfer step is a thermal transfer step or a softening point of the thermoplastic resin is equal to or lower than the temperature for heating the fabric in the thermal transfer step. Franke teaches this (Franke, col. 8, lines 47-54, col. 6, lines 60-62, see claim 14, Note that a heat transfer of an inkjet printed ink layer at 170-180 degrees is performed as the transfer step. Note that the softening point of Superflex is less than the heat of the heat transfer step). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make use a heat transfer step, as disclosed by Franke, as the transfer step of Takeuchi because doing so would facilitate reliable transfer and fixing of the ink image onto the print medium.
Takeuchi in view of Franke teaches wherein the adhesive ink is applied in a 2:1 ratio to the image forming ink (Takeuchi [0052]). Takeuchi in view of Franke does not teach an application amount of the adhesive ink in the second layer forming step is 38 g/m² or more, and the sum of an appli1cation amount of the image forming ink in the first layer forming step and the application amount of the adhesive ink in the second layer forming step is 212 g/m² or less. Kashiwazaki teaches wherein an ink layer can be applied to a cloth medium in an amount of up to 100 g/m squared (Kashiwazaki, [0135]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply ink in the amount disclosed by Kashiwazaki in the device disclosed by Takeuchi in view of Franke because doing so would amount to applying a known technique to a known device in need of improvement to yield predictable results. Upon applying, say 50 g/m of image forming ink, the amount of applied adhesive ink would be 100 g/m, which would meet the limitation.
Takeuchi in view of Franke and Kashiwazaki does not expressly teach wherein a solid content of the thermoplastic resin is 5% by mass or more and 25% by mass or less based on a total amount of the adhesive ink. However, according to MPEP 2144, where the general conditions of a claim are present in the prior art, it is not inventive to arrive at workable or optimum ranges via routine experimentation. Here, all other claimed conditions are present, and the addition of a range of thermoplastic resin is a simple optimization of that range, which is not inventive.
Takeuchi in view of Franke and Kashiwazaki does not teach wherein the adhesive ink is applied such that a duty in the range of 300% to 700% is obtained. Koike teaches applying an ink at a duty of 400% (Koike, [0111]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply an ink at 400% duty, as disclosed by Koike, in the device disclosed by Takeuchi in view of Franke and Kashiwazaki because doing so would amount to combining a known duty to a known ink deposition step to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claim 2, Takeuchi in view of Franke, Kashiwazaki and Koike teaches the transfer recording method according to claim 1, wherein the first layer is formed by discharging a first image forming ink including a chromatic color material and a second image forming ink including a white pigment in a superimposed manner in the first layer forming step (Takeuchi, [0064]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 3, Takeuchi in view of Franke, Kashiwazaki and Koike teaches the transfer recording method according to claim 1, the thermoplastic resin is one or more kinds selected from a polyester resin, a urethane resin, an acrylic resin, and a vinyl chloride resin (Takeuchi, [0143]).
Regarding claim 4, Takeuchi in view of Franke, Kashiwazaki and Koike teaches the transfer recording method according to claim 1, the thermoplastic resin has a softening point of 80°C or higher and 170°C or lower ([0131], Note that the softening point of Superflex 300 is 99°C).
Regarding claim 5, Takeuchi in view of Franke, Kashiwazaki and Koike teaches the transfer recording method according to claim 1, the image forming ink further includes a thermoplastic resin ([0087]), and the sum of an application amount of the image forming ink in the first layer forming step and an application amount of the adhesive ink in the second layer forming step is 76 g/m² or more (see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 6, Takeuchi in view of Franke, Kashiwazaki and Koike teaches the transfer recording method according to claim 1, recording resolution is 600 dpi X 600 dpi or more (Kashiwazaki, [0170]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
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).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEJANDRO VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, RICARDO MAGALLANES can be reached at 571-202-5960. 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.
/ALEJANDRO VALENCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights