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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 6/4/2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection over Matsuo (US 2009/0286035) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection have been entered in view of Moore (US 2006/0147720).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuo et al. (US 2009/0286035) in view of Moore (US 2006/0147720).
PNG
media_image1.png
147
411
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Matsuo teaches a sheet joined body comprising a first sheet member 10 and a second sheet member 20 which are joined together by joining member 30 (¶ 34, see Fig. 1C). The sheet members are metal (¶ 60). The sheet members abut each other by cross section, and the joining member covers the end edge portions of the sheet members (see Fig. 1C). Matsuo teaches the joining member is a thermoplastic resin, which is joined to the sheet members by a welding operation (¶ 27). Melting and solidification of the joining member is inherent to a welding operation absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Matsuo does not expressly teach the joining member is the claimed epoxy or phenoxy resin. Moore teaches a phenoxy resin derived from bisphenol A and epichlorohydrin (¶¶ 8-12) which is used for bonding metal to metal (¶¶ 20-21). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to use the phenoxy resin of Moore as the thermoplastic resin for joining metal members because the prior art recognizes the phenoxy resin can be used to bond metals and there is an expectation of success in substituting one element for another element known in the art to be effective for bonding metal. Since the phenoxy resin of Moore is the same as that claimed, it is presumed to be an amorphous thermoplastic resin absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 2, Matsuo teaches the thickness of the sheet members is not more than 500 μm (¶ 64), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claims 3-4, Matsuo teaches the sheet joined body are wound by rolls (¶ 120), which implicitly teaches a band-like shape in the longitudinal direction.
Regarding claim 5, Matsuo teaches forming a joining member on both sides of the joined sheet body (¶ 53).
Regarding claim 8, Moore states phenoxy resins do not contain epoxy groups.
Regarding claim 9, Matsuo teaches the thickness of the joining member is 10-150 μm (¶¶ 70-71), which lies within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 10, Matsuo teaches using a temporary adhesive on the joining member to stick onto the sheet members (¶ 75).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 XIAOBEI WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5705. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM EST.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/XIAOBEI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights