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/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species B, with claims 1-10 readable on the elected species, in the reply filed on March 16, 2026 is acknowledged. Species A is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 5-10 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
●claim 5, “two” should be inserted after “the” (line 8)
●claim 5, “the” should be inserted before “at” (line 10)
●claim 5, “elements” (line 10) should be amended to read “element”
●claim 6 , “bodies” (line 3) should be amended to read “body”
●claim 6, “devices” (line 3) should be amended to read “device”
●claim 6, “additive” should be inserted after “the” (line 9: 2nd recitation)
●claim 7, “elements” (line 3) should be amended to read “element”
●claim 7, “the” should be inserted after “on” (line 3)
●claim 8, “at least one” should be inserted after “the” (line 26 and line 14: 2nd recitation)
●claim 9, “at least one” should be inserted after “the” (line 5)
●claim 10, “at least one” should be inserted after “the” (lines 27 and 37).
Specification
The use of the term(s) GLARE, ARALL, CARALL, and TiGr, which are trade name(s) or a mark(s) used in commerce, has been noted in this application. Applicant should review the disclosure for all trade name(s) or mark(s) recited therein. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used
as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by
functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified
by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
advancement means claim(s) 1, 2, 8
coupling unit claim(s) 1, 2, 7
tractor device claim(s) 1
feeding means claim(s) 2
pre-fixer(s) claim(s) 3, 4, 5
pressing device(s) claims(s) 4, 5, 6
invitation body claim(s) 6
cutting elements claim(s) 7
machine claim(s) 9
device claim(s) 9
Note in claim 4 that the structural feature of the pressing device having “a passage opening” (lines 6-8) is not clearly required by claim 4 due to the user of “preferably” (line 7) – thus the placement of “pressing device(s)” in the above list.
Note in claim 5 that the structural feature of the two pressing device being in a form of “cylinders or rollers” (line 3) is not clearly required by claim 5 due to the use of “preferably” (line 3) – thus the placement of “pressing device(s)” in the above list.
Note in claim 6 that the structural feature of the invitation body having “a wedge-shaped portion” (line 8) is not clearly required by claim 6 due to the use of “preferably” (line 8) – thus the placement of “invitation body” in the above list.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, the phrase "preferably” (line 8) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Also, see the same in claim 4 (line 7), claim 5 (lines 3 and 10), claim 6 (lines 2, 3, and 8), claim 7 (line 2), claim 8 (lines 10, 13, 21, and 26), and claim 10 (lines 3, 8, 12, 14, 16, 18, 25, 27, 32, and 38).
Claim 8, the phrase "even more preferably” (lines 21-22 and 28-29) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Also, see the same claim 10 (lines 4, 5, 19-20, 25, and 38).
Claims 1-7 are considered to be indefinite in that the claims do not clearly set forth the number of basic sheet/lamina elements and the number of additive sheet/lamina element required by the claims. For example, claim 1 begins with “at least one” of each – then at many other locations in claims 1-7 (wherein claims 2-7 depend from claim 1) the claims recite “the basic” and “the additive”.
Claim 4 is considered to be indefinite in that it is unclear how may pre-fixers are required and how may pressing devices are required given that claim 3 recites, for example, recites “at least one pre-fixer” and claim 4 (which depends from claim 3) recites “said pre-fixer” (line 1).
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the passage throttling" (line 5). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, see the same in claim 7 (line 4).
Claim 6 is considered to be indefinite in that it is unclear the pressing device, recited in line 7) refers to the one or more previously recited pressing devices or to a different pressing device. The same applies to “at least one pressing device (lines 8-9).
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the total surface” (lines 27 and 29). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim and the surface being referenced is not clearly defined. Also, see the same in claim 10 (lines 24, 26, 36-37, and 39).
Claim 10, there appears to be a word or words missing in line 23 between “surface discontinuities” and the minimum quantitative ratio. Also see the same in claim 10 in line 36.
Claim 10 is considered to be indefinite in that it is unclear if the recited “through cavities and/or holes and/or through notches and/or geometric surface discontinuities (lines 22-23) are the same (or different from) those recited in claim 8 (lines 24-25).
Claim 10 contains the trademark/trade names: GLARE, CARALL, AND TiGr (lines 32-33). Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe materials of a composite and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. Claim 10 is considered to be indefinite in that “type materials” (line 33) is not clearly defined. The claim and the specification do not provide a definition or criteria for what constitutes something to be a “type material”. Thus, one skilled in the art cannot determine the scope of the claim.
Claim 10 recites that the additive sheet/lamina element belongs to product families known with the commercial names “dry-film photoresist” or “solder mask photoresist” or “adhesive tape” or “cover layer adhesive” or “dielectric film” (lines 28-30). This portion of the claim is indefinite in that the claim and the specification do not define these terms. Paragraph 37 of the specification refers to such formulations as having a “secret nature and mostly known to the technicians in the field”. Thus, one skilled in the art cannot determine the scope of the claim.
Claim 9, the limitations “machine” and “device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Applicant may:
Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
Amending the written description of the specification such that it
expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material,
or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) and 102(b) as being anticipated by Taguchi (US 5,685,943).
Claim 1, Taguchi teaches laminator device 10 (column 8, paragraph 6) comprising:
●advancement means (comprising at least tension roll 18 and vacuum suction bar 70)
adapted to determine a movement in temporal continuity (i.e. continuously) of at least one basic sheet/lamina element 12 and at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12 along a processing direction (vertical direction illustrated in Figure 1) (column 8, paragraph 7; column 17, paragraph 1); and
●a coupling unit (comprising at least tacking member body 21 and roller 62) adapted to
approach and couple the at least one basic sheet/lamina element 12 to the at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12 along at least one face of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 at least at a coupling line substantially transverse to the processing direction (transverse: horizontal direction illustrated in Figure 1) (column 8, paragraphs 8 and 11; column 12, paragraph 7)
●characterized in that the advancement means comprise at least one tractor device (i.e. vacuum suction bar 70) arranged downstream part of the coupling unit along the processing direction (for example, Figures 1 and 11B) and adapted to exert a tensile action on the basic sheet/lamina element
Other locations within reference may be included in the above recited locations (paragraphs, drawing, abstract, claims) to demonstrate further the features in the reference as claimed in the instant claims.
With respect to claimed advancement means, coupling unit, and tractor device, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for these items to perform the claimed functions. Taguchi teaches structures for these items to perform the same claimed functions. Taguchi is thus considered to meet these limitations of the claim.
Claim 2, Taguchi teaches that the advancement means comprise feeding means (i.e. tension roll 18) in temporal continuity of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and of the additive sheet/lamina element 12, the feeding means 18 being arranged upstream of the coupling unit along the processing direction (Figure 1) and being adapted to allow an unwinding and/or a dispensing of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and of the additive sheet/lamina element 12 (column 8, paragraph 7).
With respect to claimed advancement means, coupling unit, and feeding means, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for these items to perform the claimed functions. Taguchi teaches structures for these items to perform the same claimed functions. Taguchi is thus considered to meet these limitations of the claim.
Claim 3, Taguchi teaches that the coupling unit comprises:
●at least one pressing device (i.e. tacking member body 21 (and roller 62)) defining a
passage throttling along the processing direction (illustrated in Figures 10A-10C and 11A-11B) crossable/there-along by the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the additive sheet/lamina element 12, the coupling line being defined at the passage throttling end (column 8, paragraphs 8 and 11; column 12, paragraph 7); and
●at least one pre-fixer (comprising at least film holding member 42) cooperatively active
with the at least one pressing device 21 and adapted to define the coupling line when the at least one pressing device 21 is illustrated in Figures 3A-3B), the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the additive sheet/lamina element 12 being continuously coupled starting from the coupling line following along the processing direction (column 10, paragraph 7; column 11, paragraph 2; column 14, paragraphs 1 and 6).
With respect to claimed pre-fixer, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches a structure for this item to perform the claimed function. Taguchi teaches a structure for this item to perform the same claimed function. Taguchi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claim 4, Taguchi teaches that the pre-fixer 42 is at least partially inscribed in the at least one pressing device (see a portion of annotated Figure 12A illustrated below) and is reversibly configurable between a non-intervention condition in which it is withdrawn inside the pressing device (Figure 10A) itself and a marking condition in which it partially emerges from the pressing device (Figure 10B) and is adapted to help define the coupling line on the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and on the additive sheet/lamina element 12 when it presses the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and on the additive sheet/lamina element 12 to tacking member body 20 which can then move towards the coupling line (column 12, paragraph 2)
PNG
media_image1.png
538
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claimed pre-fixer(s) and pressing device(s), because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for these items to perform the claimed functions. Taguchi teaches structures for these items to perform the same claimed functions. Taguchi is thus considered to meet these limitations of the claim.
Claim 5, Taguchi teach that the coupling device comprises:
●two pressing devices arranged in a mutually facing and mutually counter-rotating
relationship with respect to opposite faces of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 along the processing direction (Figure 1); and
●two pre-fixers 42 respectively housed in each of the two pressing devices and
coordinately emerging from the pressing devices themselves to determine respective marking conditions on opposite faces of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and of at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12 associated and coupled to the basic sheet/lamina element 12 itself (see discussion of Taguchi above).
With respect to claimed pre-fixer(s) and pressing device(s), because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for these items to perform the claimed functions. Taguchi teaches structures for these items to perform the same claimed functions. Taguchi is thus considered to meet these limitations of the claim.
Claim 6, Taguchi teaches that the coupling unit comprises at least one invitation body (comprising at least film holding member 42) cooperatively active with at least one pressing device (i.e. tacking member body 21 (and roller 62)) to facilitate a movement of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the additive sheet/lamina element 12 in a passage throttling along the processing direction (illustrated in Figures 10A-10C and 11A-11B), the at least one invitation body 42 being reversibly configurable between a distal condition in which it is substantially separated from the at least one pressing device and a proximal condition in which it is interposed near or adjacent to the at least one pressing device and the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and/or the sheet/lamina element 12 (see a portion of annotated Figure 12A illustrated below) (column 10, paragraph 7; column 11, paragraph 2; column 12, paragraph 2; column 14, paragraphs 1 and 6)
PNG
media_image2.png
538
599
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claimed pressing device(s) and invitation body, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for these items to perform the claimed functions. Taguchi teaches structures for these items to perform the same claimed functions. Taguchi is thus considered to meet these limitations of the claim.
Claim 7, the coupling unit further comprises at least one cutting element (comprising at least stationary knife 54A and rotary knife 54B)) activatable on the at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12 to determine selectively determinable partitions (Figure 12B) upstream of a portion of the passage throttling along the processing direction (column 10, paragraph 5).
With respect to claimed coupling unit and cutting element(s), because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for these items to perform the claimed functions. Taguchi teaches structures for these items to perform the same claimed functions. Taguchi is thus considered to meet these limitations of the claim.
Claim 8, Taguchi teaches a method for obtaining sheet/lamina semi-processed products (Abstract; column 3, paragraphs 5-8) comprising the following steps:
●providing a basic sheet/lamina element 12 and at least one additive sheet/lamina
element 12
●moving the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the at least one additive sheet/lamina
element 12 in advancement means (comprising at least tension roll 18 and vacuum suction bar 70) adapted to determine a movement in temporal continuity (i.e. continuously) along a processing direction (vertical direction illustrated in Figure 1) (column 8, paragraph 7; column 17, paragraph 1); and
●approaching and coupling the basic sheet/lamina element 12 to the at least one
additive sheet/lamina element 12 along at least one face of the basic sheet/lamina element 12 at least at a coupling line substantially transverse to the processing direction (transverse: horizontal direction illustrated in Figure 1) (column 8, paragraphs 8 and 11; column 12, paragraph 7)
●characterized in that the step of moving the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12 comprises a sub-step of exerting a tensile action on the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the additive sheet/lamina element 12 in a mutually coupling condition using drive rollers 64 (Figure 1: right of nip of rollers 62) (column 12, paragraph 7), and
●characterized in that the basic sheet/lamina element 12 and the at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12 cooperatively define, at least during the step of approaching and coupling the basic sheet/lamina element 12 to the at least one additive sheet/lamina element 12, the semi-finished product having a presence of geometric surface discontinuities at least in the basic sheet/lamina element 12 surface contacting base plate 26 which is a printed surface board necessarily having different geometric surface discontinuities (Abstract; column 8, paragraphs 5-8).
Other locations within reference may be included in the above recited locations (paragraphs, drawing, abstract, claims) to demonstrate further the features in the reference as claimed in the instant claims.
With respect to claimed advancement mean, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for this item to perform the claimed function. Taguchi teaches structures for this item to perform the same claimed function. Taguchi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claim 9, Taguchi teaches that at least the steps of moving the basic sheet/lamina element 12
With respect to claimed machine and device, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Taguchi teaches structures for this item to perform the same claimed function. Taguchi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claim 10, Taguchi teaches that the basic sheet/lamina element 12 comprises a composite materials in that such comprises a three layer structure (column 8, paragraph 7) and has the presence of geometric surface discontinuities at least in the basic sheet/lamina element 12 surface contacting base plate 26 which is a printed surface board necessarily having different geometric surface discontinuities (Abstract; column 8, paragraphs 5-8).
Prior Art of Record
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s invention:
●Griebat teaches a taping machine having pre-fixer 20/22 with a nip-roll-combination
●Nagate teaches a lamination device having a pre-fixer 30 and two pressing devices
●Limberger teaches a pre-fixer at item 84 in a laminating device
●Jackson teaches a registration transfer device with a pre-fixer comprising a spring/coil
●Huang teaches laminating a web to a surface having pre-fixer at 46 and coupling roller 30
●Broadmeyer teaches a pre-fixer 126 moving in-and-out a press roller 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA GRAY whose telephone number is (571) 272-5778. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Phil Tucker can be reached at (571) 272-1095. 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.
/LINDA L GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Prosecution Insights