DETAILED 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on June 3, 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 6 recites in line 8 “an isocyanate group” and then in line 9 “the isocyanate group (NCO group).” The claim is confusing as “(NCO group)” is recited after “an isocyanate group” is introduced earlier in line 8.
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.
Claim(s) 6, 7, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroshi (JP2016010912 (A)) as understood from the provided translation of the reference, in view of Weisman (US 3499848) and Kanagawa et al. (US 2013/0158149 A1) (“Kanagawa”).
With respect to claim 6, Hiroshi discloses a laminated body obtained by layering and integrating a flexible surface member on and with a soft polyurethane foam (abstr., 0010-0014, 0017), wherein the soft polyurethane foam and the surface member are bonded by a moisture-curable hot melt adhesive (0014, 0015, 0019). Hiroshi does not state explicitly that the laminated body is an irregularly shaped laminated body, and the soft polyurethane foam and the surface member are irregularly shaped. Hiroshi does disclose that the laminated body is used in seats and interior materials of vehicles (0027). Weisman discloses a laminated body comprising a flexible surface member and polyurethane foam, wherein the laminated body is irregularly shaped and the polyurethane foam and the flexible surface member are irregularly shaped (col. 1, lines 30-35, col. 3, lines 22-41, col. 6, lines 42-69, Fig. 3), wherein the laminate is used in automotive industry and furniture, providing shock absorbing and insulating qualities (col. 6, lines 62-67). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the laminated body of Hiroshi as a irregularly shaped laminated body wherein the soft polyurethane foam and the surface member are irregularly shaped since the laminates of Weisman can be used in upholstering as do the laminates of Hiroshi, laminates of Weisman providing shock absorbance and insulating qualities.
The references are silent regarding the hot melt adhesive containing a urethane prepolymer having an isocyanate group at a terminal and the content of the group being from 1% to 10%.
Kanagawa discloses a moisture curable hot melt adhesive comprising a urethane prepolymer (abstr, 0055, 0065, 0133, 0204, 0207) having isocyanate terminal groups, wherein their content in the urethane prepolymer is 3.99% (Example 6), 3.88% (Example 16) (Table 1), 3.89% and 3.80% (C. Ex. 3 and C. Ex. 4) (Table 2). The content of the isocyanate group is within the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the hot melt adhesive in the laminated body of Hiroshi and Weisman having a content of terminal isocyanate group as recited in Kanagawa as such percentages are known in the art of moisture-curable hot melt adhesives.
Regarding claim 7, Hiroshi, Weisman and Kanagawa teach the laminated body according to claim 6. Weisman discloses shaping of the polyurethane foam and the surface member performed by thermal compression (col. 6, lines 33-41). Furthermore, the claim defines the product by how the product is made, thus, claim 7 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps (MPEP 2113). In the instant case the recited steps imply the structure of claim 7. The references teach the structure.
As to claim 9, Hiroshi, Weisman and Kanagawa teach the laminated body of claim 6. Hiroshi discloses a back surface member – element 15 - layered with the soft polyurethane foam (abstr., 0013, 0034). Weisman discloses a recess and a protrusion being present at the same position in a lamination direction in the surface member and the back surface member (Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 10, Hiroshi, Weisman, and Kanagawa teach the laminated body of claim 6. Hiroshi discloses a melting point of the urethane prepolymer of from 70˚ C to 200˚ C (0031). The range of melting point overlaps the range recited in claim 10; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima face obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
Kanagawa teaches a urethane prepolymer viscosity of 2100 mPa · s (Example 6), 3250 mPa · s (Example 16) (Table 1), and 3540 mPa ·s (C. Ex. 3, and C. Ex. 4). (Table 2), the viscosities being within the claimed range.
Regarding the application amount of the hot melt adhesive, Hiroshi discloses that the amount of the applied adhesive to the foam depends on the melt viscosity of the adhesive, heating temperatures of the adhesive storage tank, the supply roll and the application roll (0039). The adjustment is made by the rotational speed of the supply roll and the application roll, the clearance between the outer peripheral surface of the application roll and the surface of the foam, and the feeding speed of the foam (0039). Thus, the application amount of the adhesive is optimized based on the melt viscosity of the adhesive, heating temperatures of the adhesive storage tank, the supply roll and the application roll.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on June 3, 2026 have been fully considered.
The Applicant argued that Hiroshi and Weisman fail to discloses the recited NCO group content. The Examiner notes, a new reference of Kanagawa discloses the content within the recited range, as discussed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOANNA PLESZCZYNSKA whose telephone number is (571)270-1617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~ 11:30-8.
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, Maria Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/Joanna Pleszczynska/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights