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 18 March 2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-20 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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: the claimed viscosity being a dynamic viscosity measured in a dynamic viscosimeter measured at 32°C with a shear rate of 1000 s−1 as stated in the disclosure since said temperature and shear rate must be taken into consideration to accurately determine and report viscosity for most materials, and the method steps for measuring a parameter must appear completely in the claim. Claim 1 does not specify all the essential technical features needed to define the invention and therefore lacks clarity. The same rejection applies to Claims 2-20 since they depend from claim 1 and include all of its limitations.
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 1-4, 6-8, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Van Den Bergen et al. (US 2017/0297354 – “Van Den Bergen”.)
Regarding claim 1,
Van Den Bergen discloses a method for printing a decorative sheet for making decorative panels, the method comprising:
providing a sheet [paper substrate 12 in fig. 2; Abstract; paragraphs 0016 and 0030; claim 16];
applying a printed motif to the sheet by means of digital printing [Abstract; paragraphs 0002 and 0030; claim 16];
wherein the printed motif is applied using a pigmented ink [Abstract; paragraphs 0030 and 0146; claim 26]; and
wherein the pigmented ink has a viscosity above 30 mPas [paragraph 0045.]
Regarding claim 2,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the pigmented ink is water-based or aqueous [Abstract; paragraphs 0030 and 0146; claim 26.]
Regarding claim 3,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the ink comprises a solid portion and a fluid portion; and
wherein the solid portion represents at least 10% weight of the ink itself [paragraph 0163.]
Regarding claim 4,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the sheet comprises an ink receiver layer [Abstract; paragraph 0244];
wherein the ink receiver layer has a laydown of less than 30 g/m2 [Table 7.]
Regarding claim 6,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the pigmented ink has a viscosity below 150 mPas at 20°C [paragraph 0045.]
Regarding claim 7,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the sheet is a paper layer with a Gurley value below 30 seconds, measured according to Tappi 460.
Regarding claim 8,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the sheet is a paper layer having a base weight of 50 to 100 grams per square meter [paragraph 0077.]
Regarding claim 15,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein a dry weight of the deposited pigmented ink is less than 5 grams per square meter [Table 8.]
Regarding claim 17,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein a drop size of the deposited pigmented ink is less than 50 picoliters [claim 16.]
Regarding claim 18,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the pigmented ink has a viscosity below 100 mPas at 20°C [paragraph 0045.]
Regarding claim 19,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the pigmented ink is deposited using a digital inkjet printer [paragraph 0047.]
Regarding claim 20,
Van Den Bergen further discloses wherein the digital inkjet printer is of the single-pass type or is operated in a single-pass mode [paragraphs 0006 and 0033-0034; claim 24.]
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.
Claims 5, 9-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Den Bergen.
Regarding claims 5 and 9-14,
Van Den discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above but fails to expressly disclose wherein the sheet is free of an ink receiver layer (claim 5), wherein the sheet is a thermoplastic foil comprising thermoplastic material; wherein the thermoplastic material is preferably chosen from the group of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU), and polyvinyl butyral (PVB) (claim 9); wherein the thermoplastic material comprises fillers (claim 10); wherein the fillers comprise organic fillers (claim 11); wherein the fillers comprise inorganic fillers (claim 12); wherein the thermoplastic material comprises foamed thermoplastic material (claim 13); or wherein the thermoplastic material comprises plasticizer (claim 14.)
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 the materials listed above, 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 the materials listed above for the purpose of having improved ink adherence, water resistance, and a high-quality substrate, while providing for a higher resolution of the printed motif.
Regarding claim 16,
Van Den discloses the claimed limitations as set forth above but fails to expressly disclose wherein a total volume of deposited pigmented ink is less than 20 milliliters per square meter.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a total volume of deposited pigmented ink be less than 20 milliliters per square meter, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See also In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). One would have been motivated to optimize the total volume of deposited pigment ink for the purpose of having enhanced layer adhesion and a faster drying time.
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
Prosecution Insights