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 Status
Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-4, 8, 9 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2002/0065335 to Noguchi et al. (hereinafter “Noguchi”).
Regarding claim 1, Noguchi teaches a layer formation method comprising an application step of applying an aqueous composition containing an ultraviolet curing agent, and water onto a substrate [0002-0003, and 0079], and a drying step of drying the aqueous composition applied onto the substrate [0054 and 0059], wherein a coating layer which can be peelable from the substrate is formed on the substrate using the aqueous composition [0191-0194].
Regarding claim 2, Noguchi further teaches that in the application step the aqueous composition is ejected onto the substrate by an inkjet head [0002-0003, 0031, 0045-0047, and 0135].
Regarding claim 3, Noguchi further teaches that the coating layer is a printing layer [0002-0003, 0031, 0045-0047, and 0135].
Regarding claim 4, Noguchi further teaches that the aqueous composition is an aqueous ink containing a coloring material, and the application step is a printing step of applying the aqueous ink onto the substrate [0089-0093 and 0135].
Regarding claim 8, Noguchi further teaches that the aqueous composition contains a photopolymerization initiator and a polymerizable compound as the ultraviolet curing agent, and that the photopolymerization initiator and the polymerizable compound are water-soluble [0026, 0079, and 0081-0082].
Regarding claim 9, Noguchi further teaches that the aqueous composition contains a resin component for forming the coating layer, and is in an emulsion state where the resin component is dispersed in the water [0013, 0023, and 0045].
Regarding claim 16, Noguchi teaches a printed matter production method comprising an application step of applying an aqueous composition containing an ultraviolet curing agent and water onto a substrate [0002-0003, 0046, 0053 and 0079], and a drying step of drying the aqueous composition applied onto the substrate [0054 and 0059], wherein a coating layer which can be peelable from the substrate is formed on the substrate using the aqueous composition [0191-0194].
Regarding claim 17, Noguchi further teaches that the aqueous composition contains a photopolymerization initiator and a polymerizable compound as the ultraviolet curing agent, and that the photopolymerization initiator and the polymerizable compound are water-soluble [0026, 0079, and 0081-0082].
Regarding claim 18, Noguchi further teaches that the aqueous composition contains a resin component for forming the coating layer, and is in an emulsion state where the resin component is dispersed in the water [0013, 0023, and 0045].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5-7, 10-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2002/0065335 to Noguchi et al. (hereinafter “Noguchi”).
Regarding claim 5, Noguchi further teaches that the composition can be used for image printing, and for pretreatment of a substrate to provide printing suitability [0014].
However, Noguchi does not teach a printing step of ejecting or applying a printing ink onto the coating layer obtained by application or ejection onto the substrate, wherein the drying step is executed after the printing step or between the application step and the printing step.
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 method disclosed by Noguchi with a printing step of ejecting or applying a printing ink onto the coating layer obtained by application onto the substrate, with a reasonable expectation of success, since Noguchi teaches that the composition can be used for image printing, and for pretreatment of a substrate to provide printing suitability [0014].
Moreover, 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 method disclosed by Noguchi wherein the drying step is executed after the printing step or between the application step and the printing step, with a reasonable expectation of success, since Noguchi teaches a drying step after the application of the aqueous composition onto the substrate [0054 and 0059]. Furthermore, the selection of any order of performing steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new and unexpected results. Consult MPEP 2144.04 IV.
Regarding claim 6, Noguchi further teaches that a heat dryer may be employed for drying the composition applied onto the substrate [0059].
Noguchi does not teach that the drying temperature is in a range from 50°C to 220°C.
However, the drying temperature is a result effective variable modifying the film forming results. For example, if the drying temperature is too low, it risks insufficient drying of the coating layer, which may cause shifting, or cracking of the coating layer, while if the drying temperate is too high, it wastes energy and risks damages to the substate and/or the coating layer. Without evidence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine the appropriate drying temperature with predictable results, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Consult MPEP 2144.05II.
Regarding claim 7, Noguchi further teaches that a heat dryer may be employed for drying the composition applied onto the substrate [0059].
Noguchi does not teach that the drying temperature is in a range from 50°C to 150°C.
However, the drying temperature is a result effective variable modifying the film forming results. For example, if the drying temperature is too low, it risks insufficient drying of the coating layer, which may cause shifting, or cracking of the coating layer, while if the drying temperate is too high, it wastes energy and risks damages to the substate and/or the coating layer. Without evidence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine the appropriate drying temperature with predictable results, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Consult MPEP 2144.05II.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Noguchi does not teach that the substrate is a transparent non-permeable substrate.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the method disclosed by Noguchi wherein the substrate is a transparent non-permeable substrate, with a reasonable expectation of success, since Noguchi teaches that the substrate can be a non-absorptive base material in general [0053].
Regarding claim 12, Noguchi further teaches that the photopolymerization initiator has a sensitivity at a wavelength of around 400 nm [0079]. In addition, Noguchi teaches that the light-emitting spectrum of the lamp in UV range is 184 nm to 450 nm which is suitable for causing efficient reaction for the polymerization materials [0137]. Moreover, Noguchi teaches examples in which the center luminescent wavelength of the lamp was 365 nm [0148], and 400 nm ([0186], and table 5).
Noguchi does not explicitly teach that that in the irradiation step of irradiating the coating layer formed by using the aqueous composition the ultraviolet light has a peak wavelength in a range of 200 nm to 400 nm.
However, 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 method disclosed by Noguchi wherein in the irradiation step of irradiating the coating layer formed by using the aqueous composition the ultraviolet light has a peak wavelength of 400 nm, with a reasonable expectation of success, since Noguchi teaches that the photopolymerization initiator has a sensitivity at a wavelength of around 400 nm [0079], that the light-emitting spectrum of the lamp in UV range is 184 nm to 450 nm which is suitable for causing efficient reaction for the polymerization materials [0137], and an example in which the center luminescent wavelength of the lamp was and 400 nm ([0186], and table 5 of Noguchi). Moreover, in the case where the claimed range overlaps or lies inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Consult MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 13, Noguchi further teaches that the photopolymerization initiator has a sensitivity at a wavelength of around 400 nm [0079]. In addition, Noguchi teaches that the light-emitting spectrum of the lamp in UV range is 184 nm to 450 nm which is suitable for causing efficient reaction for the polymerization materials [0137]. Moreover, Noguchi teaches examples in which the center luminescent wavelength of the lamp was 365 nm [0148], and 400 nm ([0186], and table 5).
Noguchi does not explicitly teach that that in the irradiation step of irradiating the coating layer formed by using the aqueous composition the ultraviolet light has a peak wavelength in a range of 350 nm to 400 nm.
However, 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 method disclosed by Noguchi wherein in the irradiation step of irradiating the coating layer formed by using the aqueous composition the ultraviolet light has a peak wavelength of 400 nm, with a reasonable expectation of success, since Noguchi teaches that the photopolymerization initiator has a sensitivity at a wavelength of around 400 nm [0079], that the light-emitting spectrum of the lamp in UV range is 184 nm to 450 nm which is suitable for causing efficient reaction for the polymerization materials [0137], and an example in which the center luminescent wavelength of the lamp was and 400 nm ([0186], and table 5 of Noguchi). Moreover, in the case where the claimed range overlaps or lies inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Consult MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 14, Noguchi further teaches that the irradiation step is a step of irradiating with the ultraviolet light a surface of the substrate on which the coating layer is formed [0135] (see figure 3B).
Regarding claim 15, Noguchi further teaches that in the irradiation step, a back surface of the substrate opposite to a surface of the substrate on which the coating layer is formed is irradiated with the ultraviolet light [0135] (see figure 3B).
Regarding claim 19, Noguchi does not teach that the substrate is a transparent non-permeable substrate.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the method disclosed by Noguchi wherein the substrate is a transparent non-permeable substrate, with a reasonable expectation of success, since Noguchi teaches that the substrate can be a non-absorptive base material in general [0053].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARLYN I RIVERA-CORDERO whose telephone number is (571)270-7680. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9:00 AM to 2:00 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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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.
/A.I.R/Examiner, Art Unit 1714
/KAJ K OLSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights