DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1-4, 10, 13-14, 18, 21, 24, and 28, 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.
Independent claim 1 recites “a label support for arranging a label…” and further “an adhesive layer disposed on the upper part and the lower part [of the holding body]” which is unclear and indefinite. There is no adhesive disposed on the upper part of the label support as claimed. The Specification describes a “label element 50 in the form of a printed adhesive label 50’” (0184, Fig. 5). Thus, the adhesive on the upper part is only present as the label itself, yet no label is positively recited by the claims but rather a label support for arranging a label as explicitly recited in the preamble. Adhesive only exists on the upper part once the label is applied, yet the scope of the claim is a label support with no positive recitation of the label (explicitly stating that the label support is for application of a label). Thus, the label support itself, as claimed, does not have an upper part with adhesive.
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.
Claims 1-4, 13-14, 18, 21, 24, and 28, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Puttkammer (US 7,301,682).
In respect to claims 1-3 and 18, Puttkammer discloses a label support comprising: a “holding body” 1/2 configured to hold a label (either direct text or an adhesive label thereon); the holding body comprising at least one transparent layer 1* configured to arrange thereon said label (a flat surface); and at least one transparent section (layer) 2, comprising a plastic layer on an “lower part” of the “holding body” which is electronically conductive (e.g. PEDT/PSS) (and thus is functionally capable of contactless induction) (Col. 3, 35-47; Fig. 1). *Support web 1 is also transparent as would be readily ascertained by one of ordinary skill in the art, since the hologram (lacquer 3 and reflection layer 4) are underneath and are visually inspected.
In respect to claim 4, Puttkammer discloses that the transparent section 1 “upper part” is “configured to attach a print with the label” (i.e. printing located on a label intended to be provided on the top surface of the transparent section).
In respect to claims 13 and 14, Puttkammer discloses that the holding body is configured to be releasably held in a “holding state” via adhesive 5 (Col. 3, 20-26; Fig. 1).
In respect to claims 21 and 24, Puttkammer discloses that the entire “holding body” is a multilayer film body (Fig. 1), capable of forming an “upper part” and “lower part” i.e. wrapping or vertical application to an object.
In respect to claim 28, Puttkammer discloses a metallic layer 4 (part of the hologram) thus characterizing the holding body as a “foil”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Puttkammer (US 7,301,682) in view of Electrically Conductive Plastics (NPL)
Puttkammer only discloses intrinsically electronically conductive plastics, however, Electrically Conductive Plastics teaches that traditional plastics may be provided with additives to afford conductivity. It would have obvious to substitute the discloses intrinsically electronically conductive plastics taught in Puttkammer with plastics having conductive additives in view of Electrically Conductive Plastics, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant contends that Puttkammer fails to disclose at least the upper part of the holding body, however, this is not disclosed by the applicant as described in the 35 USC 112(b) above.
As for the “label support for arranging a label…”, Puttkammer discloses an upper part of the holding surface capable of receiving an adhesive label. Due to the conflicting language, it is also permissible to read “an adhesive layer disposed on the upper part [of the holding body]” as an intended step. The holding body of Puttkammer, if receiving an adhesive label, would then have an upper part having an adhesive layer (bottom layer of the adhesive label).
A more detailed comparison to Puttkammer or other prior art cannot be completed without an amendment clarifying the subject matter discussed in the 35 USC 112(b) rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT GRABOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3518. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-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, Daniel Troy, can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
/KYLE R GRABOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights