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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 07/29/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 8-12 are withdrawn as a non-elected invention.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisao et al. (JP 63-153186 A).
Claim 1: Hisao teaches a thermal transfer material 1 comprises a first ink layer 3 and a second ink layer 4 sequentially provided on a base 2, wherein each of the first ink layer 3 and second ink layer 4 comprises a coloring agent dispersed in a heat-fusible binder (overview/abstract and Fig. 1). Hisao teaches the first ink layer 3 comprises the colorant/coloring agent has a color tone complementary to that of the second ink layer 4 (page 6, lines 10-12).
Hisao teaches the amount of the coloring agent/colorant in the second ink layer is 1-60% (page 6, line 21). Hisao lists suitable examples of the heat-fusible/hot-melt binder in page 6, lines 39-40 and page 7, lines 1-10. Since the listed binder materials are by nature transparent or translucent, and the content of the colorant is 60% or less, it is interpreted that the second ink layer is not opaque. Hisao does not expressly teach the second ink layer is translucent; however, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to select a translucent second ink layer, and the motivation would be to modify the appearance of the underlaying first ink layer.
Claim 2: Hisao teaches the amount of the coloring agent/colorant in the second ink layer is 1-60% (page 6, line 21). Hisao lists suitable examples of the heat-fusible/hot-melt binder in page 6, lines 39-40 and page 7, lines 1-10. Since the listed binder materials are by nature transparent or translucent, and the content of the colorant is 60% or less, it is interpreted that the second ink layer is not opaque.
Hisao does not teach the claimed L value; however, the experimental modification of this prior art in order to ascertain optimum operating conditions fails to render applicants' claims patentable in the absence of unexpected results. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select a second ink layer with an L value of 20 or less, and the motivation would be to control light transmission to the underlaying first ink layer which maximizes the sharpness of the first ink layer. A prima facie case of obviousness may be rebutted, however, where the results of the optimizing variable, which is known to be result-effective, are unexpectedly good. In re Boesch and Slaney, 205 USPQ 215.
Claim 3: Hisao teaches the coloring agent/colorant in the second ink layer can be a dye (page 6, line 18) in an amount of 1-60% (page 6, line 21) which overlaps with the claimed 50% or more.
Claim 4: Hisao lists suitable examples of the heat-fusible/hot-melt binder of the first ink layer in page 6, lines 39-40 and page 7, lines 1-10. These examples include a thermoplastic material, e.g., polyvinyl alcohol (page 7, line 8); and an adhesive material, e.g., polyurethane (page 7, line 6).
Claim 5: Hisao lists suitable examples of the heat-fusible/hot-melt binder of the second ink layer in page 6, lines 39-40 and page 7, lines 1-10. These examples include a thermoplastic material, e.g., polystyrene-based resin (page 7, line 9); and a wax material (page 6, line 39).
Claim 6: Hisao teaches the thermal transfer material 1 further comprises a second adhesive layer 5 between the first ink layer 3 and the second ink layer 4 (Fig. 3 and page 8, lines 2-3). The second adhesive layer 5 meets the claimed middle layer.
Claim 7: Hisao teaches the material of the second adhesive layer 5 can be similar to that of the second ink layer 4 (page 8, lines 3-4). Hisao lists suitable examples of the heat-fusible/hot-melt binder of the second ink layer in page 6, lines 39-40 and page 7, lines 1-10. These examples include a thermoplastic material, e.g., polystyrene-based resin (page 7, line 9).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisao et al. (JP 63-153186 A) as applied to claims 1 and 6, and further in view of Manabu et al. (JP H11268226 A).
Hisao teaches the claimed invention as set forth above.
Claim 7: Hisao does not teach the second adhesive layer 5 comprises styrene-based thermoplastic elastomer. However, Manabu teaches an adhesive layer 6 in a transfer film, wherein the adhesive layer 6 comprises a styrene-based thermoplastic elastomer heat-fusible material (page 10, lines 30-33). Hisao and Manabu are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is the thermal transfer art. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the styrene-based thermoplastic elastomer of Manabu with the invention of Hisao, and the motivation for combining would be, as Manabu suggested, to provide good adhesion (page 10, line 32).
Pertinent Prior Art
Sato et al. (US 5,106,676).
Correspondance
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETELHEM SHEWAREGED whose telephone number is (571)272-1529. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7am-4:30pm.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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.
BS
September 18, 2026
/BETELHEM SHEWAREGED/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights