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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 5/9/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/9/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: please amend the claim to recite “-20 ℃.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: please amend the claim to recite “23 ℃” in both incidents. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: please amend the claim to recite “180°” in both incidents. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-12 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.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear from the claim limitations, and in light of the specification, what is and what is not being claimed, given that the requirement that monomer (a2) has a glass transition temperature (Tg) lower than monomer (a1) is not consistently disclosed. For example, paragraph 0020 of the specification as originally filed discloses that monomer (a1) includes n-butyl acrylate, which has a Tg of -54 ℃ (see the attached Aldrich Data Sheet), and is disclosed as being the preferred monomer (a1); and paragraphs 0022, 0025 and 0028 of the specification as originally filed discloses that monomer (a2) includes hydroxy-group-containing and carboxy-group-containing (meth)acrylates, which have Tg values higher than n-butyl acrylate. For example, acrylic acid has a Tg of 105 ℃ and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate has a Tg of 57 ℃ (see the attached Aldrich Data Sheet).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6 and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al. (US 2020/0017722 A1), and in light of the evidence provided via Satake et al. (US 5814685).
Regarding claim(s) 1-3, 6 and 11-12, Uchida teaches a double-sided pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) sheet (adhesive sheet) that is capable of being used for adhesion of two component member of a flexible display device (current claim 11) (para 0001). The double-sided PSA sheet has no substrate (adhesive layer), and is formed via a PSA composition comprising a (meth)acrylate ester (co)polymer (A) (para 0025), crosslinking agent (B) (photocurable compound (B)) and photoinitiator (C) (photopolymerization initiator (C)) (para 0027-0028). The PSA layer is formed on a release film (current claim 12) (para 0226).
Uchida also teaches that the (meth)acrylate ester (co)polymer (A) comprises:
an alkyl (meth)acrylate having 4 to 18 carbon atoms in a side chain such as, inter alia, a
combination of n-butyl acrylate (alkyl (meth)acrylate (a1), linear alkyl group with 4 carbon atoms) and 2-ethylhexyl acrylate (para 0101-0105, 0112), and is present at 30 to 90 % by mass of the copolymer (para 0134);
a copolymerizable monomer (B) such as 2-hydroxyethyl (meth)acrylate (polar group-containing monomer (a3), current claim 2) (para 0114), and is present at 0 to 30 % by mass of the copolymer (para 0136); and,
has a mass average molecular weight (Mw) of 100,000 to 1,500,000 (para 0144), which overlaps that presently claimed (600,000 to1,500,000, current claim 3). The Examiner notes that 2-ethylhexyl acrylate is identical to that presently disclosed as representative for the presently claimed (meth)acrylate (a2) having glass transition temperature (Tg) lower than the Tg of alkyl (meth)acrylate (a1).
Uchida does not teach the presently claimed storage shearing elastic modulus of 800 kPa or less at -20 ℃, or 500 kPa or less at -20 ℃ (current claim 6), and does not specify that the n-butyl acrylate is present at 20 to 60 mass%, or the presently claimed mass ratio (W(a2)/W(a1) = 0.3 to 3.0) of the 2-ethylhexyl acrylate to the n-butyl acrylate, but Uchida does teach that the (meth)acrylate copolymer has a Tg of -50 to -20 ℃ (abstract, para 0128) towards the prevention of “buckling” (para 0086) and adequate flexing durability (para 0184).
Uchida further discusses the storage shear elastic modulus (G’) as dependent on the temperature towards improving the flexing resistance (para 0023, 0072); and the prevention of “buckling” due to the Tg and (G’) being too high at a particular temperature (para 0086) and the prevention of “flowing” due to the (G’) being too low at a particular temperature (para 0087).
Uchida also teaches that alkyl (meth)acrylates having a tertiary carbon atom (e.g., 2-ethylhexl acrylate) provide for adjusting the modulus (G’) (para 0110) as does the selection of the photoinitiator (C) (para 0168). Uchida further instructs that the modulus (G’) and the whitening resistance (e.g., the haze) benefit from including the copolymerizable monomer (B) (e.g., 2-hydroxyethyl (meth)acrylate) (para 0131).
The Examiner notes that it is established in the art that the Tg of a polymer is determined from the Tg values of the monomeric components comprising said polymer, and their respective proportions, as evidenced via Satake (see column 4, lines 4-19 therein).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide the n-butyl acrylate in the presently claimed mass% and the presently claimed mass ratio of the 2-ethylhexl acrylate to the n-butyl acrylate - and to further provide the PSA layer with the presently claimed modulus (G’) - based on the Tg of the copolymer (A), the prevention of “buckling” and “flowing,” and the flexing durability required of the prior art’s intended application as in the present invention.
Regarding claim 4, Uchida teaches that the crosslinking agent (B) comprises, inter alia, bisphenol A polyethoxy di(meth)acrylate (para 0158), with the polyethoxy portion providing a polyalkylene oxide skeleton
Regarding claims 9-10, while Uchida does not specify that the PSA sheet is transparent, with a light transmittance of not less than 80% and a haze not greater than 5%, Uchida is conspicuously directed to the employing the PSA sheet in optical components (para 0233), which one skilled in the art would recognize as requiring optical properties such as transparency and minimal haze.
Indeed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to adjusting the optical properties of the PSA sheet of Uchida to those presently claimed based on said properties required of the prior art’s intended application as in the present invention.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al. (US 2020/0017722 A1) in view of Asano (US 2023/0295476 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Uchida teaches the PSA sheet in the rejection of at least current claim 1 set forth above. Uchida is silent to the PSA sheet further comprising a silane coupling agent (D), but Uchida does instruct that the PSA further comprises known additives (para 0178).
However, Asano teaches an adhesive composition for image display device (title) comprising an acrylic resin (A) (para 0083), cross-linkable monomer (C) (para 0104) and a silane coupling agent towards a balance of adequate adhesion, transparency and moisture-and-heat resistance under high-temperature and high-humidity (para 0119-0121).
Indeed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide the PSA of Uchida with a silane coupling agent towards said PSA demonstrating the balance of adequate adhesion, transparency and moisture-and-heat resistance under high-temperature and high-humidity as required of the prior art’s intended application as in the present invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al. (US 2020/0017722 A1) in view of Takarada et al. (US 2011/0111220 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Uchida teaches the PSA sheet in the rejection of at least current claim 1 set forth above. Uchida is silent to the PSA sheet having a gel fraction of 30 to 95 mass%.
However, Takarada teaches an optical-use PSA sheet (title) comprising a PSA layer having a gel fraction of 30 to 80% by weight towards a balance of flexibility and hardness (para 0048).
Indeed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide the PSA of Uchida demonstrating the presently claimed gel fraction based on the balance of flexibility and hardness as required of the prior art’s intended application as in the present invention.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al. (US 2020/0017722 A1) in view of Asano (US 2023/0295476 A1) and in further view of Takarada et al. (US 2011/0111220 A1) and Kikuchi et al. (US 2019/0047264 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Uchida/Asano/Takarada teaches the PSA sheet in the rejection of at least current claim 1 set forth above. Uchida is silent to the PSA sheet demonstrating the presently claimed oil-resistant adhesion rate under the presently recited conditions.
However, as noted previously, Uchida teaches that the PSA (meth)acrylate copolymer comprises of a preponderance of n-butyl and 2-ethyhexyl acrylates. It is significant to notes that n-butyl and 2-ethyhexyl acrylates provide acrylate polymers with oil resistance as disclosed in Kikuchi (see para 0357 therein). The Applicant is also respectfully reminded that,
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in
structure or composition, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has
been established. "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually
exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable.
Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant
discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15
USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2112.01.
Thus, given that the cited prior art teaches all the limitations of the presently claimed adhesive sheet, including identical components in identical proportions, it is reasonable to conclude that the PSA sheet of the prior art would demonstrate the presently claimed oil-resistant adhesion rate under the claimed conditions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK D DUCHENEAUX whose telephone number is (571)270-7053. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 PM - 5:00 PM.
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, Alicia A Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
/FRANK D DUCHENEAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 5/29/2026
Prosecution Insights