Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/923,290

PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE COMPOSITION, PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE, PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE SHEET, AND LAMINATE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 04, 2022
Examiner
KRUER, KEVIN R
Art Unit
1787
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Lintec Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
27%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 7m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 27% of cases
27%
Career Allow Rate
212 granted / 798 resolved
-38.4% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 7m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
853
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
51.3%
+11.3% vs TC avg
§102
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§112
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 798 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 8, 14, and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 1/7/2026. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed 2/6/2023 and 1/24/2024 have been fully considered. Initial copies of said IDSs are enclosed herein. Drawings The drawings filed 11/4/2022 are accepted. 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. Claim(s) 1-7 and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2005-36081A (herein referred to as Mitsubishi) in view of JP2020015801A (herein referred to as Watanabe). Mitsubishi teaches a pressure sensitive adhesive composition (See “Solution”) section of translation) comprising a (meth)acrylic ester polymer (A) (see solution section) containing, as a monomer unit constituting the polymer, an ethylene carbonate-containing monomer having an ethylene carbonate structure represented by Formula (1) (0001; formula 3). Mitsubishi does not teach that the composition should further comprise an ionic compound (b). However, Watanabe discloses an adhesive sheet having an adhesive layer wherein the adhesive layer contains an antistatic agent (abstract). Said antistatic agent is included in the adhesive is 0.1 mass% or more and 10 mass% or less (abstract). The antistatic agent is an ionic compound and may comprise a nitrogen-containing onium salt or an alkali metal salt (see all; page 4; claims 1-4). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include an ionic antistatic agent, such as an alkali metal salt, to the adhesive layer disclosed in Mitsubishi. The motivation for doing so would have been because teaches such antistatic agent are useful in adhesive compositions in amounts of 0.1-10wt%.   With regards to claim 2, Mitsubishi teaches the pressure sensitive adhesive composition contains 0.5 mass% or more and 40 mass% or less of the ethylene carbonate-containing monomer as the monomer unit constituting the polymer (0006), preferably 2 to 30 mol% (0014) when used as a PSA. With regards to claim 5, Mitsubishi teaches the pressure sensitive adhesive composition may comprise content of a crosslinker in the pressure sensitive adhesive composition is 0.1 mass parts or less with respect to 100 mass parts of the (meth)acrylic ester polymer (0029). Alternatively, said reference describes that "in adjusting the curable resin composition, the concentrations of the copolymer (A) and the cross-linking agent (B) are not limited, and can be selected from a wide range in consideration of the use, the coating method, the coating thickness, etc." (0029). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to appropriately adjusted the contents of the copolymer and the cross-linking agent in the composition described for the purpose of obtaining desired characteristics. With regards to claim 6, Mitsubishi teaches a pressure sensitive adhesive obtained by crosslinking the pressure sensitive adhesive composition taught therein (see all; 0030). With regards to claim 7, Mitsubishi teaches a pressure sensitive adhesive sheet comprising at least a pressure sensitive adhesive layer, wherein the pressure sensitive adhesive layer is composed of the pressure sensitive adhesive taught therein (see all; 0030). With regards to claims 9-11, Mitsubishi does not explicitly teach the claimed gel fraction or the claimed elastic modulus. However, it is known in the art that the gel fraction and elastic modulus of an acrylic adhesive is a result effective variable controlled by the crosslinking degree of the composition (see e.g. KR 20220136059; 2022209830 A1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to control the crosslinking degree in the adhesive disclosed in Mitsubishi in order to control the gel fraction and elastic modulus of the composition. With regards to claim 12, Mitsubishi does not teach the pressure sensitive adhesive sheet should have an adhesive strength to soda-lime glass of 1 N/25 mm or more and 100 N/25 mm or less. However, Watanabe teaches an adhesive laminate wherein the adhesive force of the laminate to the soda-lime glass is 19N/25mm or when the surface on the adhesive layer side of the laminate obtained by laminating the adhesive layer m is attached to the soda-lime glass see all). Such adhesives strength provide better blister resistance. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to optimize the adhesive strength relative to soda glass to above 19N/25mm in order to improve the blister resistance of the composition. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2005-36081A (herein referred to as Mitsubishi) in view of JP2020015801A (herein referred to as Watanabe), as applied to claims above, and further in view of WO2015/132888 (herein referred to as WO). With regards to claim 13, Mitsubishi teaches a PSA composition, but does not teach applying two release sheets, wherein the pressure sensitive adhesive layer is interposed between the two release sheets so as to be in contact with release surfaces of the two release sheets. However, WO describes an adhesive sheet which includes two release sheets and an adhesive layer sandwiched between the release sheets so as to be in contact with the release surfaces of the two release sheets (Claims 1-6 and Figs. 1-2). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply release sheets to either side of the adhesive taught in Mitsubishi as WO teaches the application of such sheets to either side of and adhesive layer is a known industrial practice. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R KRUER whose telephone number is (571)272-1510. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Callie Shosho can be reached at (571) 272-1123. 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. /KEVIN R KRUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 04, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12550643
NOVEL OXIDANTS AND STRAINED-RING PRECURSORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12546012
Zn-PLATED HOT STAMPED PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12528977
Magnetic Adhesive for Use on Skin
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12503630
ORGANOPOLYSILOXANE COMPOSITION HAVING PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE LAYER FORMATION PROPERTIES, AND USE OF SAID COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12473460
CROSSLINKED POLYOLEFIN RESIN FOAM, ADHESIVE TAPE, LAYERED BODY, MOLDING, AND DISPLAY MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
27%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+29.6%)
4y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 798 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month