ankDETAILED 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 .
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 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.
Application Status
This is a first action on the merits. A preliminary amendment was filed on 06 November 2023 amending claims 3, 4, and 6-9. Claims 1-11 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06 November 2023, 29 May 2024, and 03 December 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it includes the implied phrase “The specification relates to…”. Correction is recommended. See MPEP § 608.01(b), guideline (C).
Drawings
The drawings received on 06 November 2023 are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 3, 9, and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 2, the claim should recite “…wherein the amount of the anti-blocking agent…” to be grammatically correct.
Regarding claim 3, the claim should recite “…wherein the amount of the anti-blocking agent…” to be grammatically correct.
Regarding claim 9, the claim should recite “…and the release liner (101, 201) according to claim 1, wherein…” to properly refer back to the previously recited release liner.
Regarding claim 10, the claim should recite “A method of manufacturing the label laminate (210) according to claim 9, …” to properly refer back to the previously recited laminate.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 101 and 112
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for being non-patentable subject matter, or in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 11, the claim is a “Use claim” and is not a proper process claim under § 101. See MPEP § 2173.05(q).
Alternatively, the claim purports to claim a process without setting forth any steps involved in the process, and thus raises an issue of indefiniteness under §112(b). See MPEP § 2173.05(q).
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.
(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.
Claims 1, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2000-280657 A. Applicant’s provided translation was relied upon for analysis.
Regarding claim 1, JP ‘657 discloses a pressure-bonded recording paper having a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer on one side of a support and an antistatic agent on the other side, see paragraph [0008]. The support is most preferably a paper layer, see paragraph [0016]. The adhesive layer is pressure-sensitive yet does not exhibit tackiness at its surface, see paragraph [0020]. A release agent is included in the adhesive layer to control the adhesive strength, see paragraph [0022]. Thus the adhesive layer reads on a release coating on a first surface of the substrate as claimed. An antistatic agent is provided on the opposite (second) surface of the substrate, see paragraph [0025]. A binder may be included in the antistatic layer, see paragraphs [0029-0031]. Particular antistatic agents are described at paragraph [0026], which read on the antiblocking agent. Additionally, the recording paper is recorded (printed) on one or both sides, making the recording paper suitable as a label. See paragraphs [0014] and [0055].
This reads on the claimed release liner having a paper based substrate with a first and second surface, a release coating on the first surface (the surface having the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer which includes a release agent), and an antistatic coating a binder and the anti-blocking agent on the second surface as claimed. Thus, JP ‘657 anticipates the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, JP ‘657 teaches applying the antistatic agent on one side of the support using a roll coater to give a dry coating amount of 0.5 g/m2, see paragraph [0042]. There is no indication that the coating is applied only over a portion of the substrate, and thus the Examiner has considered the entire surface of the substrate to be coated with the antistatic agent. This reads on at least 50% of the second surface comprising the antistatic coating as in claim 7, and arranged in either the machine or cross machine direction as recited in claim 8.
Claims 1-3 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yeager (U.S. Pat. 6,497,933).
Regarding claim 1, Yeager discloses a label construction including a release liner having first and second surfaces in which the first surface has a release coating and faces an adhesive layer, and a second surface which includes an antistatic composition and a binder. See col. 3, lines 28-32 and col. 4, lines 5-21. A base paper layer is disclosed for the liner, see col. 4, lines 5-21. This paper has a release coating on one surface and the antistatic composition on the other surface. See id. and FIG. 1, reproduced below. The antistatic composition includes a binder and an antistatic component which reads on the anti-blocking agent, see col. 3, lines 18-32. This anticipates the claimed release liner.
PNG
media_image1.png
310
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In FIG. 1, 12 represents a printable substrate, 20 represents a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer, 22 is a release liner having first and second surfaces 24 and 26, and antistatic composition 30. See col. 3, line 56 through col. 4, line 21.
Regarding claim 2, Yeager teaches using from 40-90 wt. % of the antistatic component in the antistatic composition, see col. 3, lines 18-26. This exceeds the claimed 15 wt. % amount of anti-blocking agent. See also Example 1 which uses about 75 weight parts of antistatic additive out of about 96 weight parts of dry components, which is about 78 wt. % of antistatic additive.
Regarding claim 3, Yeager teaches using from 40-90 wt. % of the antistatic component in the antistatic composition, see col. 3, lines 18-26. This overlaps the claimed range of 15-50 wt. % of antiblocking agent.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Yeager teaches applying the antistatic coating composition by flexographic roll coating or rotogravure coating methods, see col. 3, lines 50-55. FIGS. 1 and 2 of Yeager depict the disclosed release liner and adhesive sheet in which the antistatic coating is shown to cover the entire second surface 26 of the release liner. This reads on at least 50% of the second surface comprising the antistatic coating as in claim 7, and arranged in either the machine or cross machine direction as recited in claim 8.
Regarding claims 9 and 11, Yeager shows in FIG. 1 and 2 that the label laminate includes a substrate 12, pressure-sensitive adhesive 20, release liner having a paper base and a release coating in contact with the pressure-sensitive adhesive, and also having an antistatic layer 30 on the other surface of the paper base. See discussion at col. 4, lines 5-21 and FIG 1.
Regarding claim 10, Yeager teaches a substrate 12 which reads on the claimed filmic material face as well as release liner 22 having first and second surfaces 24 and 26. See FIG. 1 and description at col. 3, line 56 through col. 4, line 21. Yeager teaches providing a commercially available release liner of a coated paper with a release agent on one side, reading on the release coating and paper-based substrate as claimed. See col. 4, lines 6-21. Antistatic coating 30 is coated onto the second surface 26 of the release liner, see col. 3, lines 50-55. This includes both a binder and an antistatic agent reading on the antiblocking agent. See col. 3, lines 18-32. The layers are laminated together to form the film laminate shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 in which the adhesive layer 20 is between substrate layer 12 and release liner 22. This anticipates the claimed method.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeager (U.S. Pat. 6,497,933) in view of JP 2009-249540 A. A machine translation of JP ‘540 was relied upon for analysis.
Regarding claims 4, 5, and 6, Yeager is relied upon as described above. However, Yeager does not disclose or suggest using ethylene (bis)stearamide wax in the antistatic coating or the use of an acrylic binder.
JP ‘540 teaches an adhesive composition and adhesive tapes, see p. 1, first paragraph of the translation. An anti-blocking agent is added to the acrylic adhesive to prevent blocking of solids at room temperature, see p. 2, second paragraph. A suitable antiblocking agent is ethylene bis stearamide, see p. 6, fifth paragraph. This material is used as it has compatibility with an acrylic block copolymer adhesive, see p. 6, second paragraph. The adhesive composition can be used for a label, see paragraph bridging p. 7-8 and fifth full paragraph on p. 8.
Yeager and JP ‘540 are analogous they are similar in structure and function, as each describes adhesive materials used for labels. It would have been obvious to have combined an acrylic binder and an ethylene bis stearamide antiblocking agent in a layer for the adhesive label of Yeager as described in JP ‘540 as this provides a layer that can easily be attached to an adherend surface while preventing dust from adhering to the adherend surface and to prevent the surface from being damaged, see JP ‘540 at p. 2, fourth paragraph.
Prior Art of Record
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
WO 2017/172739 A1 describes a dust-free heat shrinkable article which uses an antiblocking particulate, slip agent, and release agent in the outside layer of the article to lower the gloss level, see paragraph [00118]. Bis-stearamide is a suitable antiblocking material.
Mitchell (U.S. Pub. 2018/0147806) generally describes an adhesive label laminate which includes a second skin layer with an antiblocking agent compound, see paragraph [0208].
Conclusion
All claims are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott R. Walshon whose telephone number is (571)270-5592. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 9am - 6pm.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached on (571) 272-1234. 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.
/Scott R. Walshon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759