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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-4 and 8 are rejected under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over WO 2018/235952 (Maxell reference, of record in Applicant’s IDS) in view of Fugetsu et al. US 2011/0151254 and further in view of Ohkoshi et al. US 2010/0238063.
As to claim 1, Maxell teaches a radio wave absorber film comprising: a substrate layer; and a radio wave absorbing layer formed on the substrate layer, the radio wave absorbing layer comprising a magnetic substance and a binder resin; and the binder resin comprising an aromatic ester-urethane copolymer (please N.B., Maxell teaches in [(0023, 0040, 0070, 0079] an EM Wave absorption sheet 1 molded on a resin sheet 2 wherein the sheet contains magnetic iron oxide powder la and a resin binder 1b,a polyester-based urethane resin; the magnetic substance is the magnetic iron oxide powder La, the binder resin is the resin binder 1b, and the recited copolymer is the vylon ur6100 or vylon ur8700 of Maxell). Maxell doesn’t expressly teach a dispersant comprising for instance a silane coupling agent. However, please N.B., a silane coupling agent dispersant is well-known in the art, e.g. c.f. Fugetsu [0027, 0091]. It would be obvious to modify Maxell by incorporating a silane coupling agent dispersant as taught by Fugetsu for the benefit of modulating the performance characteristic of the device as desired. The cited prior art doesn’t expressly teach the recited absolute value frequency. However, please N.B., while the cited art does not expressly teach the recited frequency, such a range is standard in the art. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use the recited frequency range, since the applicant has not disclosed that the recited range solves any problem or is for a particular reason. It appears that the claimed invention would perform equally well with a similar range. In the instant case, it appears the apparatus of the cited prior art could use the recited range as an obvious design choice within the level of ordinary skill. It would be obvious to modify the prior art by incorporating the recited number of frequency range for the benefit of modulating the device characteristic using a varying number of frequency bands.
Maxell doesn’t expressly teach the frequency band of 40-300 GHz, but please N.B., this is a routine frequency band in the art, e.g. c.f. [0005, 0023] of Ohkoshi, which teaches a band within this range.
It would be obvious to modify the cited art with the recited frequency band as taught by Ohkoshi for the benefit of modulating the device characteristic and controlling the wave absorption mechanics to the desired level.
2. The radio wave absorber film according to claim 1, wherein the binder resin has a glass transition temperature of 100°C or less (please N.B., the vylon ur6100 taught by the Maxell reference has glass transition temperature of -30C and vylon UR8700 has glass transition temperature of -22C).
3. The radio wave absorber film according to claim 2, wherein the binder resin has a glass transition temperature of O°C or less (please N.B., the vylon materials taught by Maxell reference have glass transition temperature of -30C and -22C).
4 The radio wave absorber film according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic substance comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of an epsilon-type iron oxide, barium ferrite magnetic substance, and strontium ferrite magnetic substance (esp. c.f. [0034] teaching epsilon iron oxide powder, barium ferrite magnetic powder, or strontium ferrite magnetic powder as the magnetic iron oxide powder La).
As to claim 8, Maxell teaches a method for producing a radio wave absorber film comprising: forming a radio wave absorbing layer by coating a substrate layer with paste comprising a magnetic substance and a binder resin to thereby form a coating film and then drying the coating film, the binder resin comprising an aromatic ester-urethane copolymer (esp. c.f. [0024] of Maxell reference, teaching applying magnetic wave absorbent composition on resin sheet 2 serving as base material, performing drying and molding the EM wave absorption sheet 1). Maxell doesn’t expressly teach a dispersant comprising for instance a silane coupling agent. However, please N.B., a silane coupling agent dispersant is well-known in the art, e.g. c.f. Fugetsu [0027, 0091]. It would be obvious to modify Maxell by incorporating a silane coupling agent dispersant as taught by Fugetsu for the benefit of modulating the performance characteristic of the device as desired. Maxell doesn’t expressly teach the frequency band of 40-300 GHz, but please N.B., this is a routine frequency band in the art, e.g. c.f. [0005, 0023] of Ohkoshi, which teaches a band within this range. It would be obvious to modify the cited art with the recited frequency band as taught by Ohkoshi for the benefit of modulating the device characteristic and controlling the wave absorption mechanics to the desired level.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over WO 2018/235952
(Maxell reference, of record in Applicant’s IDS) and Fugetsu et al. (of record, see above) and further in view of JP 2017/184106 of record in Applicant’s IDS.
5. (Currently amended) The radio wave absorber film according to claim 1, wherein the radio wave absorbing layer comprises a carbon nanotube. Maxell primary reference teaches claim | but not explicitly about the carbon nanotube. However, [0030, 0033, 0076, 0079, 0083] of the secondary JP reference recited above teaches carbon nanotubes contained in coating layer 13 that contains epsilon iron oxide and polurethan elastomer imparted with EM wave absorption characteristics to adjust the relative permittivity of coating layer 13. It would be obvious to modify the primary reference by employing the material layer of the secondary reference for the benefit of modulating EM wave absorber and its characteristics.
Claims 6-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maxell WO 2018/235952, of recordin Applicant’s IDS in view of Fugetsu, of record, see above, and further in view of WO 2006/059771 (Nitta reference).
6. (Currently amended) The radio wave absorber film according to claim 1, wherein the film has a thickness of 200 um or less (Maxell primary reference teaches claim 1, but not expressly about the thickness of the film; however, the Nitta secondary reference teaches in [0047] the thickness of an electroconductive reflective layer 1 is between | and 200 um). It would be obvious to modify the primary reference with the thickness of the secondary reference for the benefit of modulating the electromagnetic interference suppressing as desired per application requirement.
7. (Original) The radio wave absorber film according to claim 6, wherein the radio wave absorbing layer has a thickness of 50 um or less (please see claim 6 rejection above, the secondary reference teaches | to 100 um thickness, which includes thicknesses of 50 um or less). 9, (Original) The method for producing a radio wave absorber film according to claim 8, wherein the method comprises cutting a laminate that is obtained by forming the radio wave absorbing layer and that comprises the substrate layer and the radio wave absorbing layer to thereby obtain a radio wave absorber film having a predetermined size: please N.B., the primary reference Maxell teaches claim 8. However, it doesn’t expressly teach the size recited above. Having said that, the secondary reference Nitta teaches the concept of cutting sheet body to obtain a prescribed shape and size, esp. c.f. [0061]. It would be obvious to modify the primary reference with the teachings of the secondary reference because a common manufacturing method involves applying materials onto support structure and performing drying and cropping to build a certain shape and size.
Response to Remarks
Applicant’s remarks filed 9/4/25 are respectfully moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment.
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 t 85 Fan whose telephone number is (571)-272-3013. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9AM to 5:30PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jack Keith, can be reached at (571)272-6878. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Bo Fan/ Examiner, Art Unit 3646