DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 invention and/or species, and corresponding claims is acknowledged. The election has been made with traverse. Non-elected claims are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant argues the product requires the process of claim 1. This is not persuasive; see MPEP 2113 regarding product by process claims (process limitations are generally ignored in product claims, unless the process necessarily implies structure in the product).
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.
Claim(s) 1-14, 16, 17 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In reference to claim 1, the limitation “pressure that is both perpendicular and tangential” is unclear. This is assumed to refer to figure 13.
In reference to claim 1, the limitation “hardening polymer” is unclear. This would normally be assumed to refer a thermoset, resin, monomer, etc., however claim 11 indicates this can be “a thermoplastic polymer”. It is not clear what is meant by “hardening polymer”.
Note: Claims 2-14, 16, 17 are also rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 1.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-13 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gastaldi (US 20080128068 B1) and Official Notice
In reference to claim 1-2, Gastaldi discloses a method for producing one or more stratified decorative elements, the method comprising steps of:
thermoforming a multiple-layer film comprising a first transparent protective layer, a second decorative layer containing at least one pigment, and a third supporting layer of a thermoformable plastic material, so as to form at least one recess in the multiple-layer film and also to form, in said multiple-layer film, at least one perimetral collection channel around a perimeter of the at least one recess;
pouring into the at least one recess a hardening polymer that adheres to the third supporting layer of the multiple-layer film,
applying to the third supporting layer of the multiple-layer film, when the hardening polymer is still in a fluid state, a covering sheet, wherein said covering sheet is adhesive or double-sided or a removable semi-rigid protective film, wherein applying the covering sheet to the third supporting layer of the multiple-layer film is performed by exerting upon the covering sheet a pressure that is both perpendicular and tangential to the multiple-layer film, and wherein if by exerting said pressure that is both perpendicular and tangential to the multiple-layer film at least part of the hardening polymer flows out of the at least one recess, the hardening polymer is pushed by the pressure and flows inside the at least one perimetral collection channel; (“- thermoforming a multiple-layer film (10) comprising a first transparent protective layer (12), a second decorative layer (14) containing at least one pigment, and a third supporting layer (16) of thermoformable plastics material, so as to form at least one recess (28) in the said film (10),
- pouring into the said at least one recess (28) a hardening resin (30) which adheres to the third layer (16) of the film (10),
- applying a covering sheet (32) to the third layer (16) of the film (10) so as to enclose the poured resin (30), which undergoes a hardening process, and” [Claim 1] and see Fig 9 showing the sheet being applied down and laterally)
leaving the hardening polymer, previously poured and enclosed between the third supporting layer of the multiple-layer film and the covering sheet, to harden through a hardening process; and (Claim 10)
cutting the multiple-layer film around the said at least one recess thus obtaining a stratified decorative element comprising a portion of said multiple-layer film, a layer of the hardening polymer and a portion of the covering sheet. (“- cutting the film (10) around the said at least one recess (28), thus producing a stratified decorative element comprising a portion of the said film (10), a layer of resin (30) and a portion of the said sheet (32).” [Claim 1])
Gastaldi does not disclose the cover sheet is pressed down and to the side, but illustrates in Fig 9 that the sheet is applied from one end. It would be obvious to a person of skill in the art to press and slide the sheet down using a roller at least for the purpose of squeezing out trapped air. Using a roller/squeegee to apply a sheet such that air is not trapped is known.
In reference to claim 3, see claim 2 in the reference.
In reference to claim 4 see claim 3
In reference to claim 5-11 see claim 4-10
In reference to claim 12 see claim 10
In reference to claim 13 see claim 13
In reference to claim 16 see claim 14
Claim 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gastaldi (US 20080128068 B1) in view of US 4175686 A
Gastaldi does not disclose indium pigments. US 4175686 A teaches that punches can be made of wood (see “punches can be made of synthetic resin or wood”). Wood is porous. The combination is obvious. Using an known punch obvious substitution of parts.
Claim 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gastaldi (US 20080128068 B1) in view of US 20200270461 A1
Gastaldi does not disclose indium pigments. US 20200270461 A1 teaches that indium pigments would be useful for the same use (see title). The combination is obvious. Using an known pigment for decoration is obvious.
Conclusion
Any prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20070082155A1 teaches multi-layer films particularly suited for packaging applications, including a core layer, a tie layer made from at least 10 wt % of a first polymer and a service layer, wherein the tie layer is a sealable layer and may provide a hermetic seal when sealed to itself. The films of this invention may be suitable for use in preparing hermetically sealed packages. Optionally, the multi-layer film may have a skin layer and/or a second skin layer. Embodiments may have the advantage of improved seal strength, hermeticity, hot tack, reduced-temperature sealability, and improved packaging machine operating speed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS KRASNOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1154. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8am-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, Xiao Zhao can be reached on 571-270-5343. 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.
/NICHOLAS KRASNOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights