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 § 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 1-9 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.
Claim 1 claims properties of coefficient of thermal expansion and coefficient of hygroscopic expansion. It is unclear if the properties pertain to the polyimide film, the core layer, the first skin layer, or the second skin layer. Clarification is required.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR-20200120492 to Sung Yul et al. (Cited on IDS).
As to claims 1-4, Sung Yul discloses a multilayered polyimide film comprising a polyimide core and polyimide skin layers wherein the skin portion exists on at least one outer surface of the core portion and more preferably a 3-layer film wherein the skin portion is in contact with each of the outer surfaces of the core portion and the back surface of the outer surface (0050-0052). Sung Yul discloses a core portion comprising a polyimide prepared from 9.33 kg of m-tolidine, 4.75 kg of PPD, 12.92 kg of BPDA, and 9.03 kg of PDMA (0203). Sung Yul discloses at least one skin layer prepared from 8.37 kg of m-tolidine, 1.69 kg of ODA, 0.91 kg of PPD, 6.63 kg of BPDA, and 7.02 kg of PMDA (0205).
In the core portion, the content of BPDA is 59%, the content of PDMA is 41%, the content of PPD is 33%, and the content of m-tolidine is 66%.
In the skin portion, the content of BPDA is 52%, the content of PDMA is 48%, the content of PPD is 8%, the content of ODA is 16%, and the content of m-tolidine is 76%.
Sung Yul does not expressly disclose the thermal expansion coefficient and the hygroscopic expansion coefficient. However, the references teach the same type of multilayered polyimide film comprising core and skin layers of polyimides with overlapping and inclusive amounts of the same reactant components. Therefore, the claimed effects and physical properties, i.e. thermal and hygroscope expansion would implicitly be achieved by a composite with all the claimed ingredients. If it is the applicants’ position that this would not be the case: (1) evidence would need to be provided to support the applicants’ position; and (2) it would the Office’s position that the application contains inadequate disclosure that there is no teaching as to how to obtain the claimed properties with only the claimed ingredients.
As to claim 5, Sung Yul discloses a core portion wherein the contents of BPDA is 59%, PDMA is 41%, PPD is 33%, and m-tolidine is 66%.
As to claim 6, Sung Yul discloses a skin portion wherein the contents of BPDA is 52%, the content of PDMA is 48%, the content of PPD is 8%, the content of ODA is 16%, and the content of m-tolidine is 76%.
As to claim 7, Sung Yul discloses a co-extrusion manufacturing method for preparing the multi-layer film (0136).
As to claims 8-9, Sung Yul discloses flexible metal-clad laminates comprising the multi-layer polyimide film and an electrically conductive metal oil wherein the laminates are suitable in electronic components (0189-0195, 0198).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-7450. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:00-4:00.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
/MICHAEL L LEONARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
