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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomohisa et al. (WO 202003812).
Regarding claim 1, Tomohisa et al. teaches an optical laminate comprising an ultraviolet-absorbing adhesive layer, wherein the ultraviolet-absorbing layer comprises a base polymer, an ultraviolet absorber (See Abstract), and radical polymerization initiator (pages 6-7), wherein the base polymer include (meth)acrylic polymers (page 5). The ultraviolet absorbing adhesive layer has an average transmittance of 5% or less at a wavelength of 300 nm to 400 nm and an average transmittance of 30% or less at a wavelength of 400 nm to 430 nm (page 4).
Given the overlap between the adhesive of Tomohisa et al. and that presently claimed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an adhesive that is both disclosed by Tomohisa et al. and encompassed by the present claims and thereby arrive that the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, Tomohisa et al. teaches the (meth) acrylic polymer may contain a polyfunctional monomer (page 6).
Regarding claim 4, Tomohisa et al. teaches the UV absorber includes a benzophenone-based ultraviolet absorber (page 7).
Regarding claim 6, Tomohisa et al. teaches the (meth) acrylic polymer may include a monomer having a polymerizable functional group having an unsaturated double bond in a side chain (page 5).
Regarding claim 7, Tomohisa et al. teaches the photopolymerization initiator (A) includes 2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl-diphenyl-phosphine oxide (pages 6-7) which is identical to a photocleavage-type radical photopolymerization initiator used in the present invention.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomohisa et al. (WO 202003812) in view of Yamamoto et al. (JP 2016155981).
Tomohisa et al. is relied upon as disclosed above.
Regarding claim 3, Tomohisa et al. fails to disclose a content of the ultraviolet absorber.
However, Yamamoto et al. teaches an ultraviolet-curable acrylic adhesive composition comprising an alkyl (meth)acrylate-containing monomer component and/or partial polymer of the monomer component, an ultraviolet absorber, and a photopolymerization initiator (paragraph [0012]), wherein a content of the ultraviolet absorber (B) is 0.1 to 5 parts by mass or more relative to 100 parts by mass of the (meth)acrylic polymer (paragraph [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose a content including that presently claimed for the ultraviolet absorber of Tomohisa et al. in order to provide sufficient UV absorbing function (Yamamoto et al., paragraph [0057]).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomohisa et al. (WO 202003812) in view of Mitsubishi Chemical Group (ShikohTM product data sheet).
Tomohisa et al. is relied upon as disclosed above.
Regarding claim 5, Tomohisa et al. teaches wherein the polyfunctional (meth)acrylate includes urethane acrylate (paragraph [0047]) fails to teach wherein the polyfunctional (meth)acrylate has a molecular weight as claimed.
However, Mitsubishi Chemical Group teaches UV curable urethane acrylate oligomer resins such as UV-3310B, UV-3500BA, UV-3700B, etc. having a molecular weight range of between 5000-38000 (See pages 2-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a urethane acrylate oligomer having a molecular weight including that presently claimed for the polyfunctional (meth)acrylate of Tomohisa et al. in order to provide a variety of desired characteristics such as soft and high elongation, good elasticity, and toughness (Mitsubishi Chemical Group, page 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 10/23/2025 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.
Applicant amended claim 1 to recite transmittance of less than 30% and cancelled claim 8.
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 to CHENG HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7387. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7 AM to 5 PM.
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 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, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHENG YUAN HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787