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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment and response filed on August 25, 2026 has been entered. Claims 9-15, 19-24, and 29 are pending.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on August 25, 2026 is acknowledged. It is deemed that all pending claims, i.e., claims 9-15, 19-24, and 29, are directed to the elected invention.
Claim Interpretation
The term “pavement marking tape” is being given a broadest reasonable interpretation as reading on any article or material that is capable of being placed or adhered to a road surface.
Claim 9 contains language that the pavement marking tape “is prepared to be joined to…another pavement marking tape”. This claim language is being interpreted as being intended use and does not require the presence of another or second pavement marking tape. Accordingly, claims 13 and 15, which further define the “another pavement marking tape” do not structurally further limit the pavement marking tape of the claims.
Claims 20-23 reference a “hinge element” which is being given a broadest reasonable interpretation as reading on a bend.
Claim 24 includes the language that “the second end [or the pavement marking tape] is prepared to be spliced” is being interpreted as being intended use and does not impart any structure to the pavement marking tape.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9, 20, 22, 24, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Brinkmann (US Pub 2004/0251264).
Regarding claim 9 and 29, Brinkmann discloses a label, i.e., tape, (Figure 1) having a first end (#6) and a second end (#12) opposite the first end. The tape is packaged in a container (#5) in a festoon form arrangement such that both the first and second ends are accessible while the tape is packaged. The labels of Brinkmann are capable for being attached to a road surface; thus, as set forth above would read on a pavement marking tape.
Regarding claim 20 and 22, the arrangement of the tape in the container contains a hinge (see annotated Figure 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
284
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 24, as set forth above, the “prepared to be spliced” is an intended use limitation that is not be afforded any structural weight. The second end of the tape of Brinkmann is capable of being spliced.
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 10, 11, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brinkmann (US Pub 2004/0251264).
Regarding claim 10, 11, 14, and 15, Brinkmann does not specifically disclose that the label/tape includes a contact or pressure sensitive adhesive. However, pressure sensitive adhesives are extremely conventional to use in the label and tape art in order to obtain a label or tape that can be adhered to a surface upon contact and pressure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the tape of Brinkmann wherein the label/tape is provided with a contact pressure sensitive adhesive, motivated by the desire to obtain a label which could be readily adhered to a desired surface upon application of the label to a substrate or article.
Claims 12, 13, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brinkmann (US Pub 2004/0251264) in view of Van Florcke (US Pub 2020/0262178).
Regarding claims 12, 13, 21, and 23, Brinkmann does not disclose that the label or tape is a double-sided adhesive tape or that the label or tape includes a liner. However, adhesive labels and tapes having a double-sided adhesive and/or a liner are conventional in the art. See, for example, Van Florcke [0027]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have prepared the tape arrangement of Brinkmann wherein the label/tape is a conventionally known double-sided adhesive label that includes a liner, motivated by the desire to obtain a label which can be readily dispensed, as taught in Brinkmann, and used as conventional label and tape applications, as taught in Van Florcke.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brinkmann (US Pub 2004/0251264) in view of Ahm (US Patent No. 6,913,569).
Regarding claim 19, Brinkmann does not disclose a festoon arrangement that includes misalignments of bends in the packaged tape. Ahm, which is also directed to packaged tapes having a festoon arrangement, discloses that the bends of the arrangement can be misaligned based on the specific zigzag folding or container/packaging shape used (Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to have prepared the packaged tape of Brinkmann, wherein some of the bends are misaligned, as taught in Ahm, motivated by the desire to obtain a tape packaged in a desired non-box shape container.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Blaine Copenheaver whose telephone number is (571)272-1156. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/BLAINE COPENHEAVER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
