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 .
This action is responsive to Applicant's amendments/remarks filed 06/16/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and under examination.
The rejections as stated in the Non-Final Rejection filed 03/23/2026 are all withdrawn in view of the above amendments.
The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
1. Claims 1, 2, 4-6, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2014/0069698 A1, hereinafter Choi).
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “thermal interface” is an intended use and does not add structural difference, thus the intended use is extended little patentable weight. See MPEP § 2112.02.
Choi teaches a conductive adhesive layer comprising an adhesive material, and conductive particles (claim 1),
wherein the adhesive material is a pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA) material, and is a polymer ([0016]), which reads on the claimed resin (A);
the conductive particles can be silver coated graphite (claim 5), which reads on the claimed carbon-based material (B) having a surface coated with metal, the metal being Ag.
The conductive adhesive layer of Choi reads on the claimed composition.
Choi also teaches that the conductive particles can be both electrically and thermally conductive ([0032]). Choi further teaches that the conductive adhesive layer is used as a conductive double-sided tape to bond surfaces for electronic uses (claim 1, Fig. 1; [0004]); there is a path for electrical conductivity through the thickness of the tape, enabling electrical conductivity between first and second surfaces ([0040]).
Choi does not teach the claimed composition at once under the meaning of anticipation.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make a conductive adhesive layer comprising an adhesive material (i.e. a polymer), and conductive particles such as silver coated graphite as taught by Choi, in order to make a conductive double-sided tape for electronic uses with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Choi teaches that the conductive particles can be silver coated graphite (claim 5). Choi also teaches that the conductive particles can have a spherical shape and a flake shape; and combinations of particle shapes can be used in the composition of the invention of Choi ([0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the silver coated graphite of Choi comprising a silver coated graphite having a spherical shape, and a silver coated graphite having a flake shape, in order to make conductive particles with a reasonable expectation of success.
An aspect ratio of the silver coated graphite having a flake shape is larger than an aspect ratio of the silver coated graphite having a spherical shape. Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claims 4-6, as discussed in claim 2 above, the silver coated graphite of Choi can comprise a silver coated graphite having a spherical shape, and a silver coated graphite having a flake shape. Thus, the silver coated graphite having a spherical shape reads on the claimed carbon-based material (B1) being a spherical graphite. The silver coated graphite having a flake shape reads on the claimed carbon-based material (B2) being a plate graphite.
Regarding claims 14-17 and 20, Choi teaches that the adhesive material is a pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA) material, and is preferably a (meth)acrylate copolymer ([0016]), which reads on the claimed resin (A) including an acrylic compound.
Regarding claim 18, the limitation “thermal interface” is an intended use and does not add structural difference, thus the intended use is extended little patentable weight. See MPEP § 2112.02.
Choi teaches that the conductive particles can be both electrically and thermally conductive ([0032]). Choi also teaches that the conductive adhesive layer is molded to form a conductive double-sided tape (Figs. 1 and 4), which reads on the claimed material formed by molding the composition into a film shape or a sheet shape.
Regarding claim 19, Choi teaches that the conductive particles can comprise silver coated graphite, nickel coated-graphite, or combinations thereof (claim 5). Thus, the conductive particles of Choi can comprise both silver coated graphite and nickel coated-graphite, which reads on the claimed carbon-based material (B) having a surface coated with a metal, wherein the metal includes Ag and Ni.
2. Claims 2-13 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2014/0069698 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, and 14-20 above, and further in view of Sakaguchi (US 2018/0163112 A1, hereinafter Sakaguchi).
The disclosure of Choi is relied upon as set forth above.
Alternatively regarding claim 2, Choi teaches that the conductive particles can be silver coated graphite (claim 5). Choi also teaches that the conductive particles can have a spherical shape and a flake shape ([0034]); and combinations of particle shapes can be used in the composition of the invention of Choi ([0034]).
Choi also teaches that the conductive particles can be both electrically and thermally conductive ([0032]).
Choi does not explicitly teach that the silver coated graphite comprises a silver coated graphite having a spherical shape, and a silver coated graphite having a flake shape.
However, Sakaguchi teaches a thermally conductive layer comprising a polymer matrix, a plate-like graphite, and a thermally conductive filler (claim 1, [0065]), wherein the plate-like graphite powder preferably has an aspect ratio of more than 2, such as an aspect ratio of about 2 to 24 ([0056], [0133]), the thermally conductive filler has an aspect ratio of 2 or less, and can be spherical graphite ([0065], [0067]). An aspect ratio of the plate-like graphite is larger than an aspect ratio of the spherical graphite.
Sakaguchi also teaches that the thermally conductive layer is electrically conductive ([0046]). Sakaguchi further teaches that the thermally conductive filler having a small aspect ratio can be present in gaps between the surfaces of the plate-like graphite in a suitable manner, thereby increasing the packing density and increasing the conductivity ([0066]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the silver coated graphite as taught by Choi comprising a spherical shape and a plate-like shape as taught by Sakaguchi, in order to pack closely thereby increasing the conductivity with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claims 3-6, Sakaguchi teaches that the plate-like graphite has an aspect ratio of more than 2, such as an aspect ratio of about 2 to 24 ([0056], [0133]), which overlaps with the claimed range of “equal to or greater than 3 and equal to or less than 1200”, and reads on the claimed second carbon-based material (B2) being a plate graphite.
Sakaguchi also teaches that the thermally conductive filler can be spherical graphite ([0067]), which reads on the claimed first carbon-based material (B1) being a spherical graphite.
Regarding claims 7-13, Sakaguchi teaches that the thermally conductive layer comprises a polymer matrix, a plate-like graphite, and a thermally conductive filler (claim 1, [0065]), wherein the thermally conductive filler can be spherical graphite ([0067]).
Sakaguchi also teaches that the plate-like graphite powder is in an amount of 75 to 105 parts by mass relative to 100 parts by mass of the polymer composition (i.e. the polymer matrix) ([0063], [0101]), the thermally conductive filler is in an amount of 250 to 700 parts by mass relative to 100 parts by mass of the polymer composition (i.e. the polymer matrix) ([0070], [0101]); when the amounts added are converted into percent by volume, the plate-like graphite powder is in an amount of 10% to 25% by volume, and the thermally conductive filler is in an amount of 25% to 60% by volume, relative to 30% to 50% by volume of the polymer composition (i.e. the polymer matrix) ([0101]).
Thus, the thermally conductive filler such as spherical graphite of Sakaguchi can be in an amount of 25% to 60% by volume based on the total volume of the thermally conductive layer, which falls within the claimed range of “equal to or greater than 1% by volume and equal to or less than 90% by volume”.
The plate-like graphite of Sakaguchi can be in an amount of 10% to 25% by volume based on the total volume of the thermally conductive layer, which falls within the claimed range of “equal to or greater than 0.1% by volume and equal to or less than 30% by volume”.
The proportion of the thermally conductive filler such as spherical graphite of Sakaguchi (i.e. 25-60% by volume ) is larger than the proportion of the plate-like graphite of Sakaguchi (i.e. 10-25% by volume) in the thermally conductive layer.
Regarding claims 15-17, Choi teaches that the adhesive material is a pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA) material, and is preferably a (meth)acrylate copolymer ([0016]), which reads on the claimed resin (A) including an acrylic compound.
3. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2014/0069698 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, and 14-20 above, and further in view of Callen (US 2002/0160193 A1, hereinafter Callen).
The disclosure of Choi is relied upon as set forth above.
Alternatively regarding claim 19, Choi teaches that the conductive particles can comprise silver coated graphite, nickel coated-graphite, or combinations thereof (claim 5). Choi also teaches that the conductive particles are electrically conductive ([0032]).
Choi does not specifically that the graphite has a surface coated with both Ag and Ni.
However, Callen teaches a composite material comprising a polymer matrix, and a conductive filler, wherein the conductive filler comprises particles formed of a central carbon-based core, a non-noble metal coating on said central carbon-based core, and an outer noble metal coating on said non-noble metal coating (claims 1 and 9).
Callen teaches that the conductive filler is a silver coating on a nickel coating on a graphite core ([0015], claims 5-7), which reads on the claimed carbon-based material having a surface coated with Ag and Ni. Callen also teaches that the conductive filler exhibits improved electrical conductivity property ([0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the conductive filler that is a silver coating on a nickel coating on a graphite core as taught by Callen as the conductive particles in Choi, in order to make the conductive adhesive layer having good electrical conductivity with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
4. Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakaguchi (US 2018/0163112 A1) in view of Narayan (US 2003/0047718 A1, hereinafter Narayan).
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “thermal interface” is an intended use and does not add structural difference, thus the intended use is extended little patentable weight. See MPEP § 2112.02.
Sakaguchi teaches that a thermally conductive sheet comprises a thermally conductive layer (claim 1), and the thermally conductive sheet is interposed between a heating element and a radiator for heat transfer ([0002], [0011]).
Sakaguchi teaches that the thermally conductive layer comprises a polymer matrix, a plate-like graphite, and a thermally conductive filler (claim 1, [0065]), wherein the thermally conductive filler has an aspect ratio of 2 or less, and can be spherical graphite ([0065], [0067]).
Thus, the thermally conductive layer of Sakaguchi reads on the claimed composition. The polymer matrix of Sakaguchi reads on the claimed resin (A). The combination of the plate-like graphite and the thermally conductive filler such as spherical graphite of Sakaguchi reads on the claimed carbon-based material (B).
Sakaguchi also teaches that the thermally conductive layer is electrically conductive ([0046]).
Sakaguchi does not teach that the plate-like graphite and spherical graphite have a surface coated with a metal, the metal being at least one selected from the group consisting of Ag, Ni and Mg.
However, Narayan teaches a cured silicone formed from a curable composition comprising an electrically conductive filler, and an organopolysiloxane (claim 10), wherein the electrically conductive filler is nickel-coated graphite (claim 14).
Narayan also teaches that the nickel-coated graphite is preferable for corrosion resistance and burn resistance ([0039]). Narayan further teaches that the electrically conductive filler can have a spherical shape and/or a flake shape ([0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the plate-like graphite and spherical graphite as taught by Sakaguchi having a surface coated with nickel as taught by Narayan, in order to make the nickel-coated graphite having corrosion resistance and burn resistance with a reasonable expectation of success. Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claims 2-6, Sakaguchi teaches that the plate-like graphite has an aspect ratio of more than 2, such as an aspect ratio of about 2 to 24 ([0056], [0133]), which overlaps with the claimed range of “equal to or greater than 3 and equal to or less than 1200”, and reads on the claimed second carbon-based material (B2) being a plate graphite.
Sakaguchi also teaches that the thermally conductive filler has an aspect ratio of 2 or less, and can be spherical graphite ([0065], [0067]), which reads on the claimed first carbon-based material (B1) being a spherical graphite, and reads on the claimed aspect ratio of the second carbon-based material (B2) being larger than an aspect ratio of the first carbon-based material (B1).
Regarding claims 7-13, Sakaguchi teaches that the thermally conductive layer comprises a polymer matrix, a plate-like graphite, and a thermally conductive filler (claim 1, [0065]), wherein the thermally conductive filler can be spherical graphite ([0067]).
Sakaguchi also teaches that the plate-like graphite powder is in an amount of 75 to 105 parts by mass relative to 100 parts by mass of the polymer composition (i.e. the polymer matrix) ([0063], [0101]), the thermally conductive filler is in an amount of 250 to 700 parts by mass relative to 100 parts by mass of the polymer composition (i.e. the polymer matrix) ([0070], [0101]); when the amounts added are converted into percent by volume, the plate-like graphite powder is in an amount of 10% to 25% by volume, and the thermally conductive filler is in an amount of 25% to 60% by volume, relative to 30% to 50% by volume of the polymer composition (i.e. the polymer matrix) ([0101]).
Thus, the thermally conductive filler such as spherical graphite of Sakaguchi can be in an amount of 25% to 60% by volume based on the total volume of the thermally conductive layer, which falls within the claimed range of “equal to or greater than 1% by volume and equal to or less than 90% by volume”.
The plate-like graphite of Sakaguchi can be in an amount of 10% to 25% by volume based on the total volume of the thermally conductive layer, which falls within the claimed range of “equal to or greater than 0.1% by volume and equal to or less than 30% by volume”.
The proportion of the thermally conductive filler such as spherical graphite of Sakaguchi (i.e. 25-60% by volume ) is larger than the proportion of the plate-like graphite of Sakaguchi (i.e. 10-25% by volume) in the thermally conductive layer.
Regarding claims 14-17, Sakaguchi teaches that the polymer matrix can a silicone polymer ([0049]).
Regarding claim 18, Sakaguchi teaches that the mixed composition is molded to form a thermally conductive sheet ([0138]), which reads on the claimed material formed by molding the composition into a sheet shape.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the prior rejections have been considered but are moot, because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
As stated above, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2014/0069698 A1).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakaguchi (US 2018/0163112 A1) in view of Narayan (US 2003/0047718 A1).
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 JIAJIA JANIE CAI whose telephone number is 571-270-0951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached on 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 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.
/JIAJIA JANIE CAI/Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/MATTHEW R DIAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights