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 .
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.
Claims 1-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shibasaki et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2017-145344 A, cited in IDS submitted December 15, 2025, machine language translation provided and cited below).
Regarding claim 1, Shibasaki discloses an adhesive, comprising a polyimide (Abstract of Shibasaki, polyimide adhesive layer), wherein the polyimide is a reaction product of a reactant (a) and a reactant (b) ([0098] of Shibasaki, polyimide is reaction product of the diamine APB and the dianhydrides BPADA and BTDA), wherein the reactant (a) is a first diamine, or the reactant (a) consists of the first diamine and a second diamine ([0098] of Shibasaki, diamine APB; claim only requires one of the recited reactants; it is noted that [0060] of Shibasaki also discloses the use of combinations of diamine compounds), and the reactant (b) consists of a first dianhydride and a second dianhydride ([0098] of Shibasaki, dianhydrides BPADA and BTDA), wherein the first diamine is a diphenyl-ether-moiety-containing diamine ([0098] of Shibasaki, the diamine APB contains diphenyl ether moieties), the first dianhydride is a diphenyl-ether-moiety-containing dianhydride ([0098] of Shibasaki, the dianhydride BPADA contains diphenyl ether moieties), the second diamine is not a diphenyl-ether-moiety-containing diamine ([0098] of Shibasaki, adhesive contains only the diamine APB and therefore does not contain a second diamine), and the second dianhydride is not a diphenyl-ether-moiety-containing dianhydride ([0098] of Shibasaki, the diamine BTDA does not contain diphenyl ether moieties), wherein the total weight percentage of the first diamine and the first dianhydride is 55 wt% to 94w t%, based on the total weight of the reactant (a) and the reactant (b) ([0098] of Shibasaki, adhesive contains BPADA, BTDA and APB in a molar ratio of 0.7:0.3:1.0 which corresponds to about 87 wt% of the diamine APB and the dianhydride BPADA based on the total reactant weight of BPADA, BTDA and APB).
Regarding claim 2, Shibasaki discloses that the first dianhydride is at least one of dianhydride having a structure represented by Formula (I)
PNG
media_image1.png
130
288
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Formula (I),
wherein R1 is independently fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; a is independently 0, 1, 2 or 3; A1 is -O-,
PNG
media_image2.png
96
180
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
102
252
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image4.png
348
498
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
100
216
media_image5.png
Greyscale
R2 is independently fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; b is independently 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4; R3 is independently hydrogen, fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; R4 is independently fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; and, c is independently 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 ([0098] of Shibasaki, BPADA which meets the above formula I).
Regarding claim 3, Shibasaki discloses that the first diamine is at least one of diamine having a structure represented by Formula (II)
PNG
media_image6.png
114
340
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Formula (II),
wherein R5 is independently fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; d is independently 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4; A2 is -O-,
PNG
media_image7.png
92
178
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
464
492
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
102
212
media_image9.png
Greyscale
R6 is independently fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; e is independently 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4; R7 is independently hydrogen, fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; R8 is independently fluorine, C1-C4 alkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkyl group, C1-C4 fluoroalkoxy group or C1-C4 alkoxy group; and, f is independently 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 ([0098] of Shibasaki, the diamine APB which meets the above formula II).
Regarding claim 4, Shibasaki discloses that the second dianhydride does not consist of cyclobutane-1,2,3,4-tetracarboxylic dianhydride or the second dianhydride does not consist of 1,2,4,5-cyclohexanetetracarboxylic dianhydride ([0098] of Shibasaki, second dianhydride is BTDA which is not one of the recited compounds).
Regarding claim 5, Shibasaki discloses that the second dianhydride is bicyclo[2.2.2]oct-7-ene-2,3,5,6-tetracarboxylic dianhydride, bicyclooctane tetracarboxylic dianhydride, dicyclohexyl-3,4,3',4'-tetracarboxylic dianhydride , [3-(carboxymethyl)-1,2,4-cyclopentanetricarboxylic acid 1,4:2,3-dianhydride], 1,2,3,4-butanetetracarboxylic dianhydride, 3,3’,4,4’-biphenyl tetracarboylic dianhydride, 2,3,3',4'-biphenyltetracarboxylic dianhydride, 5-[4-(1,3-dioxo-2-benzofuran-5-yl)phenyl]-2-benzofuran-1,3-dione, 5-[3-(1,3-dioxo-2-benzofuran-5-yl)phenyl]-2-benzofuran-1,3-dione, 4,4’-(hexafluoroisopropylidene)diphthalic anhydride, 3,3’,4,4’-benzophenonetetracarboxylic dianhydride, 9,9-bis(3,4-dicarboxyphenyl)fluorene dianhydride or a combination thereof ([0098] of Shibasaki, second dianhydride is BTDA which is 3,3’,4,4’-benzophenonetetracarboxylic dianhydride).
Regarding claim 6, Shibasaki discloses that the second diamine does not consist of isophorone diamine, or the second diamine does not consist of 4-methylcyclohexane-1,3-diamine ([0098] of Shibasaki, polyimide does not include the second diamine).
Regarding claim 7, Shibasaki discloses that the second diamine is 4,4'-methylenebis(cyclohexylamine), 4,4'-methylenebis(2-methylcyclohexylamine), bis(aminomethyl)norbornane, adamantane-1,3-diamine, octahydro-4,7-methanoindene-1(2),5(6)-dimethanamine, 2,2'-bis(trifluoromethyl)benzidine, 4,4'-diamino-2,2'-dimethylbiphenyl, O-tolidine, 4,4'-methylenedianiline, 3,4'-methylenedianiline, 4,4'-diamino-3,3'-dimethyldiphenylmethane, 4,4'-methylenebis(2-ethylbenzenamine), 4,4'-methylenebis(2,6-diethylaniline), 9,10-bis(4-aminophenyl)anthracene, 2,6-naphthalenediamine, 2,6-anthracenediamine, 4,4''-diamino-p-terphenyl, 2,2-bis(4-aminophenyl) hexafluoropropane, α,α'-bis(4-aminophenyl)-1,4-diisopropylbenzene, 9,9-bis(4-aminophenyl)fluorene, 3,3',5,5'-tetramethylbenzidine, 4,4'-diamino-2,2'-dimethoxybiphenyl, 4,4'-diaminobenzophenone, or a combination thereof ([0098] of Shibasaki, polyimide does not include the second diamine; it is noted that [0055]-[0058] of Shibasaki disclose a number of diamines that can be used including one or more of the recited compounds such as 4,4’-methylenebiscyclohexylamine in [0058]).
Regarding claim 8, Shibasaki discloses that the molar ratio of the reactant (a) to the reactant (b) is 1: 1.05 to 1.05: 1 ([0098] of Shibasaki, adhesive contains BPADA, BTDA and APB in a molar ratio of 0.7:0.3:1.0 which corresponds to a molar ratio of a to b of 1:1).
Regarding claim 9, Shibasaki discloses that the polyimide has a weight average molecular weight of 5,000 g/mol to 3,000,000 g/mol ([0051] of Shibasaki, polyimide has a weight average molecular weight of 20,000 to 200,000).
Regarding claim 10, Shibasaki discloses the adhesive as claimed in Claim 1, further comprising: a solvent, wherein the adhesive has a solid content of 2wt% to 20wt% ([0098] of Shibasaki, polyimide solution includes NMP and xylene as solvents and has a solids content of 15% by mass).
Regarding claim 11, Shibasaki discloses a multilayer structure, comprising: a first substrate; and an adhesive layer disposed on the first substrate, wherein the adhesive layer is a cured product of the adhesive as claimed in Claim 1 ([0097] of Shibasaki, polyimide solution applied to polyimide film and used to bond the film to a PC board surface).
Regarding claim 13, Shibasaki discloses the multilayer structure as claimed in Claim 11, further comprising: an electronic element, wherein the adhesive layer disposed between the first substrate and the electronic element ([0097] of Shibasaki, polyimide solution applied to polyimide film and used to bond the film to a PC board surface; PC board is an electronic element).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibasaki in view of Seki et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP H11-284292, machine language translation provided and cited below).
Regarding claim 12, Shibasaki does not specifically disclose that the first substrate is a transparent substrate. Moreover, Shibasaki discloses that the first substrate is a polyimide film used as a coverlay film for a PCB ([0097] of Shibasaki) but does not disclose the transparency of the coverlay film. Seki discloses a polyimide coverlay film for a circuit board which is transparent (Abstract, [0007] of Seki). According to Seki, the transparent coverlay film allows underlying features such as alignment marks to be visible through the film ([0007] of Seki). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a transparent polyimide coverlay film in the multilayer structure of Shibasaki. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to allow underlying features such as alignment marks to be visible through the film as taught by Seki ([0007] of Seki).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER W. RAIMUND whose telephone number is (571) 270-7560. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00-4:30.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
CHRISTOPHER W. RAIMUND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1746
/CHRISTOPHER W RAIMUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746