DETAILED ACTION
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed on April 10, 2026 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has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action mailed on December 16, 2025 (“previous OA”) has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s amendment filed on April 10, 2026 (“amendment”) has been entered.
Support for the amendment to claims 1 and 8 can be found in paragraphs 0033 and 0049 of the published application.
In view of the amendment, the rejection of claim 17 under 35 USC 112(d) as set forth in the previous OA is withdrawn.
In view of the amendment, the rejection of claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 17 under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Okawa et al. (US 20190225840 A1) alone or in view of Niimi et al. (US 20120156456 A1) is withdrawn.
In view of the amendment and after further search and consideration, a new rejection under 35 USC 102/103 over Hasegawa et al. (WO 2019155970 A1) is introduced.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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 1,3-8, 10-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hasegawa et al. (WO 2019155970 A1; machine translation of Hasegawa is relied upon in the OA).
As to independent claims 1 and 8, Hasegawa teaches an adhesive tape (PSA film) comprising a base material and a PSA layer on at least one side of the base material (abstract, page 2 under “DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS”).
Further, as to claim 1, Hasegawa teaches that the adhesive tape is configured to be peeled off by radiation (abstract, first paragraph on page 4 “After the energy ray irradiation to the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer, the pressure-sensitive adhesive strength of the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer is 3100 mN/25 or less. After energy beam irradiation, that is, when peeling the adhesive tape for semiconductor processing from the ring, the pressure sensitive adhesive layer should be peeled well not only from the wafer but also from the ring frame”).
Further, as to claims 1 and 8, Hasegawa teaches that the gel fraction of the PSA layer before irradiation is 35% or more and 50% or less (page 3, see “1.1.1. Gel fraction before energy beam irradiation”). Thus, the gel fraction of the PSA layer of Hasegawa before active energy irradiation is within the claimed range of 15% by mass or more and 50% by mass or less.
Further, as to claim 8, Hasegawa teaches that the PSA layer is a PSA composition containing acrylic polymer and energy ray curable resin (active energy radiation-curable compound) (page 4 under “1.2.1. Functional group-containing acrylic polymer” and page 7 under “1.2.3 Energy ray curable resin”).
As to claims 1 and 8, Hasegawa teaches claimed invention except for the property that before the irradiation of the PSA layer, “the PSA layer has a first temperature region, within a range of 70°C to 100°C, in which a loss tangent tanδ thereof at a frequency of 1 Hz is 0.8 or greater”. However, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness is established. See MPEP 2112.01 (I). The examiner submits that the PSA layer of Hasegawa as disclosed above and the claimed PSA layer are identical or substantially identical. Specifically, the claimed PSA layer includes acrylic polymer and active energy radiation-curable compound, which is disclosed by Hasegawa. Further, applicant discloses that the loss tangent of the PSA layer can be adjusted by e.g. adjusting the gel fraction of the PSA composition that forms the PSA layer (0047 of the published application). As set forth previously, the gel fraction of the PSA layer disclosed by Hasegawa is within the claimed range. Accordingly, absent any factual evidence on the record, it is reasonable to presume that the PSA layer of Hasegawa would inherently have the claimed loss tangent. Alternatively, claimed loss tangent would obviously be present, once the PSA layer of Hasegawa is provided.
As to claims 3 and 10, Hasegawa does not explicitly teach property of the stress at 100% elongation in the base material. However, no difference is seen between the claimed base material and base material of Hasegawa. Accordingly, absent any factual evidence on the record, it is reasonable to presume that the base material of Hasegawa would inherently have the claimed property.
As to claims 4 and 11, Hasegawa discloses that the adhesive tape is attached to a wafer to protect the circuit on the wafer surface (page 2 under “BACKGROUND-ART”).
As to claims 5, 6, 12, and 13, Hasegawa discloses that a release sheet (e.g. PET) is formed on a surface of the adhesive layer (page 2, last paragraph; page 13 under “Manufacture of adhesive tape for semiconductor processing” disclosing “SP-PET 3810314” release sheet). As such, Hasegawa teaches a carrier and a laminate, wherein the release sheet is a carrier and a resin film.
As to claim 7, this claim recites a resin film as an optical film. The present application discloses that resin film can be formed of PET (0144 of the published application). Hasegawa teaches PET film (page 2, last paragraph; page 13 under “Manufacture of adhesive tape for semiconductor processing” disclosing “SP-PET 3810314” release sheet). Given that Hasegawa discloses identical resin film as present application, it is clear that the Hasegawa discloses the resin film as an optical film.
As to claim 17, Hasegawa teaches claimed invention except for the property that before the irradiation of the PSA layer, “the PSA layer has a second temperature region, in a range of over 100°C, in which a loss tangent tanδ thereof at a frequency of 1 Hz is 0.8 or greater”. However, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness is established. See MPEP 2112.01 (I). The examiner submits that the PSA layer of Hasegawa as disclosed above and the claimed PSA layer are identical or substantially identical. Specifically, the claimed PSA layer includes acrylic polymer and active energy radiation-curable compound, which is disclosed by Hasegawa. Further, applicant discloses that the loss tangent of the PSA layer can be adjusted by e.g. adjusting the gel fraction of the PSA composition that forms the PSA layer (0047 of the published application). As set forth previously, the gel fraction of the PSA layer disclosed by Hasegawa is within the claimed range. Accordingly, absent any factual evidence on the record, it is reasonable to presume that the PSA layer of Hasegawa would inherently have the claimed loss tangent. Alternatively, claimed loss tangent would obviously be present, once the PSA layer of Hasegawa is provided.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments in the amendment have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Takahashi (US 20090065133A1) discloses a PSA sheet comprising a substrate and an active energy ray curable PSA layer, wherein the PSA layer has a gel fraction of 50% or more before irradiation (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANISH P DESAI whose telephone number is (571)272-6467. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 am ET to 4:30 PM ET.
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 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.
/ANISH P DESAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 April 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights