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 § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-8, 10-13, and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moon et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0166786 for the reasons outlined previously.
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.
Claims 3, 4, 9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0166786 for the reasons outlined previously.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ argument that the raw numerical difference between the endpoints of the claimed- and prior art range is not so important as is the difference between them in percentage terms- the upper endpoint of the range defining the amount of an epoxy-functional silane in Moon represents a figure half that of the lower endpoint of the corresponding claimed range- is understood and might have been compelling if not for the fact that the data provided within their 132 declaration actually confirms what the Examiner had previously only speculated to be technically plausible. That is to say, Applicant notes that, when the amount of the epoxysilane is doubled from 0.1 parts to 0.2 parts relative to 100 parts of the monomer mixture, the former exhibits inferior performance in terms of peel strength and shear strain. However, the Examiner finds their argument to be curious insofar as the composition of supplemental example 1 still complies with the conditions of claims 1 and 5, meaning that the composition of supplemental example 1 exhibits a variation of shear strain rate of less than 10% as claim 1 stipulates and a variation of peel strength of less than 20% as claim 5 demands.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MARC S ZIMMER whose telephone number is (571)272-1096. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Heidi Kelley can be reached at 571-270-1831. 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.
May 10, 2026
/MARC S ZIMMER/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Prosecution Insights