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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Application Status
This is a first action on the merits following applicant’s response to a restriction/election requirement mailed on 15 January 2026. A preliminary amendment was filed on 03 February 2026 amending claim 1. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 25 April 2024 and 09 September 2024 and 01 December 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group I (product claims 1-17) in the reply filed on 03 February 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 1-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Karim (U.S. Pat. 5,721,289).
Regarding claim 1, Karim discloses a semi-structural pressure sensitive adhesive tape (see title, abstract, and col. 15, lines 19-35). The tape is curable and thus reads on a reactive tape, see col. 15, lines 19-20.
Example 1 described at col. 20 of the application includes a reactive polyacrylate mixture with 60 parts by weight of a 75:25 ratio of phenoxyethyl acrylate and isobornyl acrylate, 40 parts of a 75:25 ratio of EPON 828 and EPON 1001F epoxy resins, 3.8 parts of a 1:1 ratio of cyclohexane dimethanol and 1,6-hexanediol, 1.2 parts of dimethyl 2,2’-azobisisobutyrate (WAKO V-601), and 1.6 parts of eta-xylenes mixed isomers with eta-cyclopentadieneyl)-iron(1+)-hexafluoroanimonate (CpFeXyl SbF6) (see Glossary spanning columns 18-19). The phenoxyethyl acrylate when polymerized reads on the at least one poly(meth)acrylate (a)(i)(b) in which R1 and R3 and R4 are each hydrogen, n is 1, and AR is the phenyl radical. Isobornyl acrylate reads on the comonomer acrylic monomer (a)(ii). The EPON 828 and EPON 1001F read on the at least one epoxide compound (b). The WAKA V-601 reads on the claimed initiator (c) for curing the epoxide. The amounts of components are within the specified ranges.
The adhesive is formed into a layer and used in an adhesive tape, see col. 21, lines 1-11.
This anticipates the claimed reactive pressure-sensitive adhesive tape.
Regarding claim 2, Example 1 of Karim is described in detail above. The phenoxyethyl acrylate when polymerized reads on the at least one poly(meth)acrylate (a)(i)(b) in which R1 and R3 are each hydrogen and n is 1. Isobornyl acrylate reads on the comonomer acrylic monomer (a)(ii). These are present in a 75:25 ratio of phenoxyethyl acrylate to isobornyl acrylate, anticipating the claimed range.
Regarding claim 3, isobornyl acrylate used in Example 1 of Karim forms a homopolymer with a glass transition temperature greater than 0°C.
Regarding claim 4, the phenoxyethyl acrylate of Example 1 of Karim reads on 2-phenoxyethyl acrylate as claimed.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Example 1 of Karim uses 60 parts by weight of the acrylic blend (a) and 40 parts by weight of the epoxy resin blend (b) as well as 1.2 parts by weight of the WAKO V-601 initiator (c), anticipating the claims.
Regarding claim 7, the WAKO V-601 initiator is a photoinitiator, see discussion at col. 18, lines 25-39 as well as the use of actinic radiation to cure the adhesive at col. 21, lines 1-11.
Regarding claim 8, The EPON 828 reads on the claimed liquid epoxy compound EPON 1001F reads on the claimed solid epoxy compound.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, The ratio of EPON 828 to EPON 1001F used in Example 1 is 75:25, or 3:1.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, EPON 828 and EPON 1001F are each diglycidyl ethers of bisphenol A, see Glossary at the bottom of col. 18.
Regarding claim 13, The adhesive is formed into a layer and used in an adhesive tape, see col. 21, lines 1-11.
Regarding claim 14, the adhesive is applied to a PET film carrier, see col. 21, lines 1-11.
Regarding claim 15, Karim discloses a semi-structural pressure sensitive adhesive tape (see title, abstract, and col. 15, lines 19-35). The tape is curable and thus reads on a reactive tape, see col. 15, lines 19-20. Before curing the adhesive is pressure-sensitive, and after curing the adhesive is semi-structural, see col. 2, lines 34-37.
Example 1 described at col. 20 of the application includes a reactive polyacrylate mixture with 60 parts by weight of a 75:25 ratio of phenoxyethyl acrylate and isobornyl acrylate, 40 parts of a 75:25 ratio of EPON 828 and EPON 1001F epoxy resins, 3.8 parts of a 1:1 ratio of cyclohexane dimethanol and 1,6-hexanediol, 1.2 parts of dimethyl 2,2’-azobisisobutyrate (WAKO V-601), and 1.6 parts of eta-xylenes mixed isomers with eta-cyclopentadieneyl)-iron(1+)-hexafluoroanimonate (CpFeXyl SbF6) (see Glossary spanning columns 18-19). The phenoxyethyl acrylate when polymerized reads on the at least one poly(meth)acrylate (a)(i)(b) in which R1 and R3 and R4 are each hydrogen, n is 1, and AR is the phenyl radical. Isobornyl acrylate reads on the comonomer acrylic monomer (a)(ii). The EPON 828 and EPON 1001F read on the at least one epoxide compound (b). The WAKA V-601 reads on the claimed initiator (c) for curing the epoxide. The amounts of components are within the specified ranges.
This anticipates the claimed reactive pressure-sensitive adhesive composition.
Regarding claim 17, The EPON 828 reads on the claimed liquid epoxy compound EPON 1001F reads on the claimed solid epoxy compound. EPON 828 and EPON 1001F are each diglycidyl ethers of bisphenol A, see Glossary at the bottom of col. 18.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karim (U.S. Pat. 5,721,289) in view of Koch (U.S. Pub. 2021/0062054).
Regarding claim 16, Karim is relied upon as described above to teach the limitations of claim 15.
Karim teaches that ethylene glycol may optionally be added to the curable composition, see col. 10, lines 57-65 and col. 11, lines 22-44 and lines 53-57. Suitable molecular weights are from 50 to 400, see col. 11, lines 27-30. However, Karim does not specify the amount of this component to use in the composition.
Koch describes an epoxy resin adhesive composition, see abstract and title. An ethylene glycol branching agent with a molecular weight of from 50 to 500 may be included in the composition as a branching agent or chain extender, see p. 5, [0063-0067]. The amount of the branching agent is no more than 10%, no more than 5% or nor more than 2 wt. % of the starting polymer, see p. 5, [0063]. Thus it would be reasonable to use no more than 2 wt. % or 5 wt. % of ethylene glycol in the adhesive composition of Karim which is within the claimed range.
The references are analogous as they each describe epoxy-containing curable adhesive compositions which may include polyethylene glycol with an overlapping molecular weight range. Thus they are similar in composition and function.
20Prior Art of Record
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Piwowar (U.S. Pub. 2021/0189201) is similar to Koch and also teaches the use of polyethylene glycol in an epoxy adhesive composition.
Kruskop (U.S. Pub. 2024/0240066), which shares inventors and the assignee with the present application, also describes a reactive adhesive tape which includes an epoxy resin component and other ingredients as claimed.
Conclusion
All claims are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott R. Walshon whose telephone number is (571)270-5592. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 9am - 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached on (571) 272-1234. 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.
/Scott R. Walshon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights