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 of Group I, claims 1 and 2, in the reply filed on April 30, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim 3 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 30, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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 – 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over JP 4409024 B2.
A machine-generated translation of JP 4409024 B2 accompanied the Restriction Requirement dated March 9, 2026. In reciting this rejection, the examiner will cite this translation.
JP 4409024 B2 disclose a sheet comprising: a thermal insulation layer; and an adhesive layer (Abstract),wherein a bulk strength of the thermal insulation layer after being subjected to a thermal history of increasing temperature from 25 to 200°C at a temperature increase rate of 47°C/min and then increasing temperature from 200 to 260°C at a temperature increase rate of 38°C/min, is greater than a 900 peel strength of the adhesive layer after being subjected to the thermal history (Table 1; Paragraph 0047 of original document; and in the alternative: Although JP 4409024 B2 does not explicitly teach the limitations a bulk strength of the thermal insulation layer after being subjected to a thermal history of increasing temperature from 25 to 200°C at a temperature increase rate of 47°C/min and then increasing temperature from 200 to 260°C at a temperature increase rate of 38°C/min, is greater than a 900 peel strength of the adhesive layer after being subjected to the thermal history, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. polyimide substrate adhered to a semiconductor) and in the similar production steps (i.e. an article that is placed through a heat cycle) used to produce the sheet. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112) as in claim 1. With respect to claim 2, the sheet is used as a thermal insulation material in a reflow step in a manufacture of a semiconductor device (Paragraphs 0001, 0023, and 0024; A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patricia L Nordmeyer whose telephone number is (571)272-1496. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6:30pm EST, Monday - Friday.
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 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.
/Patricia L. Nordmeyer/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/Patricia L. Nordmeyer/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 May 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights