DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner acknowledges the cancelation of claims 10-11 and 14 in the amendments filed 1/6/2026.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/6/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments, see the claim amendments filed 11/26/2025 and 1/6/2026, with respect to the non-statutory, double patenting rejection of claims 29, 10 and 15 over claims 1-2 and 5-9 of copending Application No. 17/896308 as set forth in paragraph 7 of the action mailed 10/6/2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 29, 10 and 15 has been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: for consistency with current claim 29, please amend the claim to recite “…wherein the at least one carrier does not have…”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim depends from canceled claim 11. Appropriate correction is required.
Rejections
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 29, 5-8, 12-13, 15 and 30 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.
Regarding claim 29, it is unclear from the claim limitations what, and what is not included, in the recitation of “and (vi) a combination thereof.” That is what of items (i)-(v) are encompassed via this recitation.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Regarding claim 12, current claim 20 recites that the PSA layer “consists of” of the items (i) and (ii), and optional items (iii)-(vi), which is not further limited via the recitation that the PSA layer “comprises” the polyacrylate and vinyl aromatic clock copolymer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29, 5-8, 12-13, 15 and 30 are allowable over the prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art reference(s) is(are);
WO 2016/075753 A1 to Lei et al. teaches an adhesive tape comprising a foamed substrate (at least one carrier) comprising thermally expandable microcapsules (microballoons), and an adhesive layer provided on the substrate (para 0006-0007), which said substrate comprises a base polymer of a polyurethane of a polyester polyol of, inter alia, ethylene glycol and sebacic acid, and/or polyether polyol of, inter alia, ethylene oxide (para 0018, 0020-0022). Lei teaches that the thermally expandable microcapsules are dispersed in the resin of the substrate (para 0034, 0070).
Lei also teaches a pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) layer disposed on the substrate (para 0042-0043) comprising a combination of a synthetic rubber-based adhesive and an acrylic adhesive (polyacrylate-based PSA) (para 0040). Lei further teaches that the substrate has a thickness of 0.08 to 0.3 mm (80 to 300 mm) (para 0041) such as 0.10 mm (100 mm) (para 0071).
While Lei discloses that an example of a synthetic rubber employed in the substrate is a styrene-isobutylene-styrene (SIBS) block copolymer (vinylaromatic block copolymer) (para 0095). Lei is silent to the combination of the acrylic adhesive and the synthetic rubber-based adhesive employed in the disclosed PSA layer in respective proportions of 50 to 90 % by weight and 10 to 50 % by weight. Lei does not describe that the polyurethane composition is a dispersion.
EP 3757157 A to Lei et al. (cited in the IDS filed 1/6/2026) is similar in its disclosure to the Lei ‘753 reference and similar in its deficiencies.
Claims 29, 5-8, 12-13, 15 and 30 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
NOTE: Were nonelected claims 17 and 22-26 rejoined, the following objections and/or rejections to the claims would be relevant:
Claim 17 – no antecedent basis for “the resultant” carrier in line 4.
Claim 17 – no antecedent basis for “the carrier” in lines 6-7.
Claim 22 – “laminating the carrier” does not further limit the “coating” limitation of current claim 17.
Claim 23 – the “applied to” is broader than the “coating” process of current claim 17.
Claim 23 – “a temporary carrier”, if appropriate, should by “the temporary carrier” as antecedent basis was previously established.
Claim 24 – the “applied to” is broader than the “coating” process of current claim 17.
Claim 24 – is “simultaneously” mean at the exact same time?
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK D DUCHENEAUX whose telephone number is (571)270-7053. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 PM - 5:00 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, Alicia A Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
/FRANK D DUCHENEAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 2/20/2026