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 3-4, 18, and 21, 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.
In respect to claims 3-4, 18, and 21, the claims are not reciting features of the label support, but rather orientation of areas of the label after intended application in an “installed state” to a holding body (e.g. a cylinder). E.g. “upper” and “lower” parts of the label support are not structural details (what one of ordinary skill would understand to mean a lower layer and an upper layer), and thus such recitations are unclear and indefinite, particularly since the “holding body” is not even defined and could constitute any structure.
The removal of the “installed state” does not ameliorate the issues at hand, as the orientations are still being claimed, with an “installed state” now assumed. Ultimately the claimed recitations are not relevant to the actual structure, and only intended orientations after application.
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, and 24, 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.
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 02/04/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The rejection remains the same, however, the rejection has been clarified in light of the remarks made by the applicant. As can be seen, the “holding body” is construed as both transparent layers 1 and 2, and the “upper part” transparent layer 1 is functionally capable of arranging a label thereon (or else printing a “label” thereon) and the “lower part” is the transparent section (layer) 2, which is conductive.
Arguments drawn to Figure 3 are moot, as Figure 5 was elected by the applicant and searched by the Examiner. The prior art of record is drawn to Figure 5.
The 35 USC 112 rejection has been obviated in part, however, claims 3-4, 18, and 21, remain rejected.
The applicant is correct that all references in the Specification are in the IDS.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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