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 .
Examiner Notes
Claims 1-12, 15, and 18-24 are currently pending, of which claims 9-12, 15, and 18-19 are currently withdrawn. Claims 21-24 are newly added.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 23 is 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 23 recites an opacity sufficient to trigger a photocell and it is unclear what range of “opacity” is required to be considered “sufficient to trigger a photocell.
For sake of further examination, any opaque adhesive will be considered sufficient to trigger a photocell as claimed.
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 1-8, 19-21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bean et al. (US 2004/0045658) in view of Karst (US 8,956,490) and further in view of Putz et al. (US 2021/0189191).
Regarding claims 1 and 24, Bean discloses a roll (60) comprising a sheet (62) wound on a core (Fig. 1) and a splicing tape (100) disposed along a length of the sheet and interconnecting two initially separate edge sections of the sheet (0002). The splicing tape including a base layer (10) and adhesive (20) on top of the base layer (0025) and does not extend beyond the edges of the backing film (Fig. 2a and 2b). The adhesive interconnects first and second ends and is provided over the first end edge and second end edge of the sections (Fig. 5, 6a).
Bean does not teach that the sheet includes a carrier film and a transferrable material disposed on the carrier film or the adhesive of the splice tape being a pressure sensitive adhesive.
Regarding the ribbon, Karst, in the analogous field of supply rolls for identification cards (column 1, lines 20-25) discloses a method of protecting the surface of an identification card (column 1, lines 55-60). Karst teaches a film laminate (108) comprising a backing layer (110) and one or more transferable layers (111) (column 3, lines 35-40). The one or more transferable layers being suitable for being transferred from the backing layer to the card substrate (column 5, lines 38-45).
A person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the sheet of Bean to comprise a film laminate as taught by Karst, to provide a laminate for protecting the surface of plastic identification cards (column 1, lines 55-60 and column 3, lines 15-20).
Regarding the adhesive, Putz, in the analogous field splice tapes (0002), teaches a pressure sensitive adhesive composition (0028).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the adhesive of the splice tape of Bean to include a pressure sensitive adhesive as taught by Putz, to provide a good adhesion quickly and stable storage (0003 and 0027).
Regarding claim 2, Karst teaches the film laminate comprising a print ribbon, laminate ribbon, topcoat ribbon, holographic film (column 3, lines 50-55, column 4, lines 5-10, lines 45-50, and lines 60-65).
Regarding claim 3, Karst teaches the coating including a printed image (column 4, lines 44-45). A person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious a printed imagine includes a multi-color print or monochromatic print.
Regarding claim 4, Karst teaches the transferrable material comprising thermally transferrable material (column 5, lines 25-30).
Regarding claim 5, Karst teaches the film laminate comprising ink, dye (column 4, lines 45-50)and protective top coat (column 4, lines 5-10).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, modified Bean does not expressly teach wherein one section of the ribbon does not include transferrable material, where this one section is a trailer ribbon or a leader ribbon. However, Bean teaches a method of splicing a new roll to the running web of a depleting roll such that the rolls are easily adhered (0008, Fig. 4-5). Karst teaches that the transferable layer is removably adhered to the backing layer (column 3, lines 40-50). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention would have found it “obvious to try” to remove some of the transferable material on either the new roll or depleting roll (e.g., trailer ribbon or leader ribbon) as the teaching represents a finite number of identified, predictable combinations. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). I.e., it would have been obvious to try bonding the splice tape to the backing layer, to increase the adherence between the rolls given the transferable layer is intended to be removed from the backing layer.
Regarding claim 8, in the structure of Beans in view of Karst, the transferrable material would be disposed on a first side of the carrier film and the splice tape would be disposed on a second side of the carrier film.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Karst teaches an identification card manufacturing device where the card supply comprises one or more card substrates (column 6, lines 50-55) and the supply roll is mounted in the lamination section (column 6, lines 60-65).
Regarding claim 21, Bean teaches a gap between the backing film and entire perimeter edge of the adhesive layer (Fig. 2a, 2b).
Claims 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bean in view of Karst in view of Putz as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 3MTM Polyester Film Tape 850 (https://web.archive.org/web/20210804105053/https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/b40071908/).
Regarding claims 22 and 23, modified Bean discloses the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Putz does not disclose the adhesive composition being opaque to infrared light/opacity sufficient to trigger a photocell.
3M, in the analogous field of splicing tapes, teaches a black splice tape (Details, page 2).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the splicing tape of Bean to include 3M Polyester Film tape 850, as these films have excellent long-term holding, high strength, and temperature resistance (Details, page 2).
Please note, as 3M 850 Black tape is taught as an exemplary splice tape which is opaque to infrared light and opacity sufficient to trigger a photo cell (specification 0030), thus these properties would be expected in the prior art combination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 09/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claims require the splice tape to be wound onto the supply roll along with the ribbon. Applicant argues that Bean does not teach the splicing tape wound on the roll since it is used to connect the end sheet from the roll to the running sheet which is from a different roll.
The claims are not limited in structure to requiring the entirely of the ribbon to be wound on the core such that the splice tape is also required to be wound on the core as argued.
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 ALICIA WEYDEMEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-1727. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-4.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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.
/ALICIA J WEYDEMEYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781