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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2 and 4-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundararaman et al. (US 2019/0225001 A1).
Claims 1, 2 and 11-14: Sundararaman teaches a biaxially oriented film [0051] comprising a base film having a first side and a print receptive coating on the second side (abstract), wherein the base film includes skin, tie and/or core layers [0059]. Sundararaman teaches the core layer comprises polypropylene {instant claim 2} [0015]. Sundararaman teaches the skin layer on both sides of the core layer [0026], and tie layer between the core and the skin layer because the tie layer is used to connect two other layers [0022]. Sundararaman teaches the metallized layer also termed as metallizable skin layer is to improve barrier properties [0028] and comprises a polyamide polymer [0029]. So far, the oriented film has a structure of: metallized layer/skin layer/tie layer/core layer/tie layer/skin layer/print receptive coating; and the metallized layer meets the claimed barrier layer and the core layer meets the claimed core layer.
Sundararaman teaches intermediate primers to provide an overall adhesively active surface for thorough and secure bonding with the subsequently applied coating composition [0048]. Sundararaman teaches the primers comprise polyurethane material [0048]. It is interpreted that the primers can be formed on the metallized layer and/or the tie layer forming the following structure: primer/metallized layer/skin layer/tie layer/core layer/tie layer/skin layer/primer/print receptive coating; and the primer on the metallized layer meets the claimed adhesive receptive layer and the primer on the skin layer meets the claimed printable coating layer.
With respect to the claimed {instant claim 11} MFFT and static buildup {instant claims 13 and 14} of the polyurethane in both the printable coating layer and the adhesive receptive layer, the experimental modification of this prior art in order to ascertain optimum operating conditions fails to render applicants’ claims patentable in the absence of unexpected results. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to adjust the MFFT values of the polyurethanes, and the motivation would be to control the layer’s properties including cracking, smoothness and cohesiveness while reducing static buildup. A prima facie case of obviousness may be rebutted, however, where the results of the optimizing variable, which is known to be result-effective, are unexpectedly good. In re Boesch and Slaney, 205 USPQ 215.
With respect to the claimed blocking force {instant claim 12}, the experimental modification of this prior art in order to ascertain optimum operating conditions fails to render applicants’ claims patentable in the absence of unexpected results. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to adjust the blocking force of the oriented film so as to control the integrity of the film. A prima facie case of obviousness may be rebutted, however, where the results of the optimizing variable, which is known to be result-effective, are unexpectedly good. In re Boesch and Slaney, 205 USPQ 215.
Claims 4 and 5: Based on the film structure above in paragraph 5 (primer/metallized layer/skin layer/tie layer/core layer/tie layer/skin layer/primer/print receptive coating); the skin layer between the tie layer and the primer layer meets the claimed printable coating receptive layer. Sundararaman teaches the skin layer comprises propylene homopolymers and propylene copolymers {instant claim 5} [0026].
Claims 6-8: Based on the film structure above in paragraph 5 (primer/metallized layer/skin layer/tie layer/core layer/tie layer/skin layer/primer/print receptive coating); the tie layers meet the claimed tie layers. Sundararaman teaches the tie layers comprise C3 polymers and/or ethylene vinyl acetate [0023].
Claim 9: With respect to the claimed viscosity of barrier layer (metallized layer), the experimental modification of this prior art in order to ascertain optimum operating conditions fails to render applicants’ claims patentable in the absence of unexpected results. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to adjust viscosity, and the motivation would be to control processability. A prima facie case of obviousness may be rebutted, however, where the results of the optimizing variable, which is known to be result-effective, are unexpectedly good. In re Boesch and Slaney, 205 USPQ 215.
Claim 10: Sundararaman does not teach the primer/adhesive receptive layer comprises a colorant. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a colorant in the layer so as to change the color of the layer or the film to a desired color because such knowledge is commonly known.
Claim 15: Sundararaman teaches the oriented film can be used for labeling [0058] and its surface is receptive to printing inks [0041].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETELHEM SHEWAREGED whose telephone number is (571)272-1529. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7am-4:30pm.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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.
BS
September 25, 2025
/BETELHEM SHEWAREGED/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1785