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 filed on July 08, 2026 has been entered and considered and an action on the merits follows.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on July 08, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The proposed drawing correction filed on July 08, 2026 has been acknowledged and approved. The drawing correction sufficiently overcomes the drawing objections noted in the previous Office action.
Specification
The proposed amendment filed on July 08, 2026 has been acknowledged and approved. The amendment sufficiently overcomes the disclosure informalities noted in the previous office action.
Response to Arguments
In Applicant's arguments filed on July 08, 2026, Applicant argued that Kim does not disclose the pad of the present invention, nor does Kim discloses the feature that "the pad is arranged in the pad placement area and positioned by the positioning protrusions, wherein a thickness of the pad is arranged to protrude from an upper surface of the positioning protrusions.”. This argument has been considered but it is not persuasive because Kim reads on claim 1 as explained in the last Office action and further explain below for more clarity.
The annotated drawing below shows that the pad (100) is arranged in the pad placement area (an area where the pad is occupied) and positioned by the positioning protrusions (see the drawing below), wherein a thickness of the pad is arranged to protrude from an upper surface of the positioning protrusions (see the drawing below). The annotated drawing below shows the upper surface of the pad (100) is higher than the upper surface of the positioning protrusions as defined by the Examiner; and thus Kim does disclose a thickness (i.e. a thickness portion of the pad above the upper surface of the positioning protrusions) of the pad is arranged to protrude from an upper surface of the positioning protrusions.
PNG
media_image1.png
530
895
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, Kim discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 1, and the rejection of claim 1 is herein repeated.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by over Kim (KR 20100116856 A).
Kim discloses a thermal transfer device, comprises:
a body, comprising an upper support (30) and a lower support (35) that extend horizontally (fig. 2);
a hot (see a heater (H) in fig. 3) pressing plate assembly (10), arranged below the upper support (30) (see fig. 2) and driven by a drive mechanism (34) to move up and down;
a bracket (20), arranged on an upper side of the lower support (35) (see fig. 2) to provide support for materials (P) to be heat-transfer printed, wherein positioning protrusions (see the drawing above) are arranged on the upper side of a bracket edge (see the drawing above), the positioning protrusions are enclosed to form a pad placement area (an area where a pad 100 occupied (see fig. 3);
a pad (100), arranged in the pad placement area (see fig 3) and positioned by positioning protrusions (see page 5, third paragraph of the English translation, which discloses when seated on an upper surface of the bracket 20, the pad 100 is in a state that cannot be moved in the longitudinal and lateral directions), wherein the thickness of the pad is arranged to protrude from an upper surface of the positioning protrusions (see the drawing above, which shows a top surface of the pad (100) is above top surfaces of both left and right protrusions).
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 2-3, as applied to claim 1 above, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Robinson (US 2018/0036980A1).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the invention substantially as claimed as set forth above, Kin does not expressly disclose the positioning protrusions are a circle of convex edges arranged around the edge of the bracket. Robinson discloses a thermal transfer device (100) having a bracket (102) on a lower support (fig. 1B), wherein the bracket including a pad (see para. 28) and a circle of convex edges arranged around the edge of the bracket (see the drawing #2 below). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the corners of the bracket of Kim into a circle of convex edges, as taught by Robinson, as an obvious matter of design choice because having a circle of convex edges at the corners does not appear to provide any unexpected result.
Regarding claim 3, see similar rejection as set forth in claim 2 above, in which the circle of convex edges of Robinson can also be interpreted as "a circle around the edge" as claimed in this claim.
Drawing #2:
PNG
media_image2.png
691
619
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10 are 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.
Regarding claim 4, the claim would be allowable because the prior art of record, considered alone or combination, neither anticipated nor renders obvious "the bracket is made of plastic, comprising a bracket body, a bracket wall edge extending downward along the periphery of the bracket body, and a reinforcing rib structure arranged on the underside of the bracket body, and the connection between the bracket wall edge and the bracket body protrudes upward and forms the positioning projections", in combination with the rest of the claimed limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 5-10 would be allowable in virtue of their dependence upon claim 4.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4520. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-5pm.
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, CHRISTOPHER L TEMPLETON can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
JIMMY T. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3725
/JIMMY T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights