DETAILED ACTION
The following Office action concerns Patent Application Number 18/441,245. Claim 1 is pending in the application.
The applicant’s amendment filed December 3, 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102 and 103
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.
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 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by, or, alternatively, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Kashihara et al (US 2005/0106382).
Kashihara et al teaches a method of making a conductive film comprising providing metal particles which are in contact with each other (par. 34-35). The metal particles are coupled together by a first metal coating which tightly bonds the metal particles to one another (par. 88; Fig. 1B). The first metal coating satisfies the claimed binder. The particles and the first metal coating (the binder) is then coated with a second metal coating (par. 89-90; Fig. 1D). The second metal coating satisfies the claimed metal coating on the particles and binder. The coated metal particles form a three-dimensional conductive network in the film (par. 37, 51). The method further comprises dispersing or immersing the network of coated metal particles in an adhesive resin to form a conductive adhesive film (par. 5, 122-126). The network is porous as that term is described in the instant specification because the particles forming the network are immersed in an adhesive resin (par. 5, 122-124).
In the event that the above disclosure is not sufficiently specific to anticipate the above listed claims, the examiner submits that the selection of the instantly claimed components and resultant properties would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art since Kashihara et al teaches a method of making a conductive film comprising each of the recited elements.
Response to Arguments
The applicant argues that Kashihara et al does not teach using the binding agent to couple the metal particles together. However, the instantly claimed binder for coupling the particles together is satisfied by the first metal coating on the particles, which binds the metal particles together (par. 88; Fig. 1B). The instantly claimed metal coating is satisfied by the second metal coating on the particles (par. 89-90; Fig 1D). The term “binding agent” in the reference refers to the adhesive resin in which the metal particles are dispersed. The grounds of rejection above do not rely on the binding agent to satisfy the claimed binder element.
Examiner’s Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Young whose telephone number is (571) 270-5078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:30 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew, can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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./WILLIAM D YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 April 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights