DETAILED ACTION
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 with traverse of Group I (claims 1-11, 13 and 14) in the reply filed on 06/11/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Examiner has not shown it would be a “serious burden” to perform a complete search and examination on all of the claims as originally filed. This is not found persuasive because both of the inventions
are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because at least the
following reason(s) apply: The inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching
different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or
search queries). Additionally, the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of
their different classification.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 12 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 06/11/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 03/06/2025 is considered and signed IDS form is attached.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 7 recites “polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer and/or (meth)acrylate terminated acrylonitrile-butadiene oligomer”, which should be “a polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer and/or a (meth)acrylate terminated acrylonitrile-butadiene oligomer”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2, lines 1-2 recites “the composition”, which should be “the two-part curable adhesive composition”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4, lines 1-2 recites “the acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (b) has an acrylonitrile content”, which should be “the at least one acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (b) has the acrylonitrile content”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5, lines 1-2 recites “the acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (b)”, which should be “the at least one acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (b)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6, line 2 recites “molecule weight”, which should be “the molecular weight”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9, lines 1-2 recites “the core-shell graft polymer (d)”, which should be “the at least one core-shell graft polymer (d)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 10, line 1 recites “part A”, which should be “Part A”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11, line 1 recites “the catalyst”, which should be “the at least one catalyst”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11, line 2 recites “part B”, which should be “Part B”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 13, line 2 recites “the first and second substrates”, which should be “the first substrate and the second substrate”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 13, line 3 recites “the adhesive composition”, which should be “the two-part curable adhesive composition”. 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.
Claim 9 is 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.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the core-shell graft polymer (d)" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 Osae et al. (US 2012/0302695 A1 cited in IDS, taken in view of evidence by Nakanishi et al. (US 2006/0264538 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 3-5 and 11, Osae et al. disclose an adhesive composition comprising mixing methyl methacrylate (i.e. claimed a), nitrile rubber such as Nipol 1072 rubber (i.e. claimed b), urethane acrylate resin UA-1 (i.e. claimed c) (Part A – a, b, c), followed by addition of cumene hydroperoxide (Part B - catalyst) (see Comparative Example CA-35, paragraphs 0317, 0318). As evidenced by Nakanishi et al., Nipol 1072 is acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber having an acrylonitrile content of 27 wt% and glass transition temperature less than room temperature (25 °C) (see paragraph 0108, 0042, 0043 and 0045). The urethane acrylate resin UA-1 is a polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer (see paragraph 0262). The adhesive composition is cured (see paragraphs 0318, 0319). Accordingly, Osae et al. disclose a two-part curable adhesive composition.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Osae et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Given that claim 2 optionally comprises (d), Osae et al. meets claims 2 and 9.
Regarding claim 6 and 8, Osae et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Osae et al. urethane acrylate resin UA-1 which is polyester-based urethane(acrylate) oligomer as noted above. Osae et al. disclose the urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer has a weight average molecular weight below about 25,000 (see paragraph 0094).
Regarding claim 7, Osae et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Osae et al. disclose the urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer is prepared from polyester polyol, i.e. polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer (see paragraph 0262). Further, the polyester polyol is obtained by reaction of sorbitol (polyol) with a lactone (see paragraph 0262), and therefore meets the claim.
Regarding claim 10, Osae et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. The adhesive composition comprises 2,6-di-tert-butyl-p-cresol inhibitor (see paragraph 0318). Given that 2,6-di-tert-butyl-p-cresol inhibitor is added prior to addition of cumene hydroperoxide (catalyst), 2,6-di-tert-butyl-p-cresol inhibitor is present in Part A (see paragraph 0318).
Regarding claim 13, Osae et al. disclose the adhesive composition can be used to bond the substrates (see paragraphs 0060). The substrates can be metal-based layer, plastic sheet, etc. (see paragraph 0302).
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.
Claims 1-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osae et al. (US 2012/0302695 A1 cited in IDS) in view of Briggs et al. (4,942,201 cited in IDS).
Regarding claims 1, 3-5 and 11, Osae et al. disclose a two-part adhesive composition comprising a first part (Part A) comprising a (meth)acrylate monomer (i.e. claimed a), a core-shell impact modifier (i.e. claimed d) and a urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer (i.e. claimed c), and a second part (Part B) comprising a component (i.e. catalyst) such as benzoyl peroxide capable of initiating and/or promoting free radical polymerization of components (curing) in the first part (see paragraphs 0031-0036 and paragraph 0212). Osae et al. disclose the adhesive composition is a two-pack system wherein Part B comprises only peroxide initiator (catalyst) and Part A comprises all the other components of adhesive (see paragraph 0216). Given that the adhesive composition of Osae et al. comprises two parts as presently claimed and given that the adhesive composition is cured, the adhesive composition of Osae et al. is a two-part curable adhesive composition.
The (meth)acrylate monomer are esters of C1-C6 monofunctional alcohols with (meth)acrylic acid (see paragraph 0074). The urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer is prepared from polyester polyol (see paragraphs 0092, 0096, 0097). That is, urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer is polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer (flexibilizing agent).
Osae et al. do not disclose an acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (i.e. claimed b) as presently claimed.
Briggs et al. disclose adhesive composition made from a methacrylate ester monomer, an elastomeric polymer having Tg below -25 °C soluble in the methacrylate ester monomer and a core-shell graft copolymer (see col. 1, lines 57-64). The elastomeric polymer exhibits plastic flow (see col. 2, lines 32-33). The elastomeric polymer can be acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber having acrylonitrile content of about 25 to about 45 wt% (see col. 2, lines 46-48). The adhesive composition exhibits a combination of high adhesive bond impact strength and high bulk tensile elongation (see Abstract).
In light of motivation for using a acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber disclosed by Briggs et al. as described above, it therefore would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber of Briggs et al. in the adhesive composition of Osae et al. in order to provide plastic flow as well as a combination of high adhesive bond impact strength and high bulk tensile elongation, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Osae et al. disclose the core-shell graft polymer such as MBS (methacrylate-butadiene-styrene) (see paragraph 0081).
Regarding claims 6 and 8, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Osae et al. disclose the urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer has a weight average molecular weight below about 25,000 (see paragraph 0094).
Regarding claim 7, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Osae et al. disclose the urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer is prepared from polyester polyol, i.e. polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer (see paragraphs 0092, 0096, 0097). It is noted that the polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer of Osae et al. will necessarily have to be either monofunctional polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer or polyfunctional polyester-based urethane (meth)acrylate oligomer. Further, the polyester polyol is obtained by reaction of a di-or higher functional polyol with a hydroxy-acid or a lactone (see paragraph 0122), and therefore meets the claim.
Regarding claim 10, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Further, Osae et al. disclose the adhesive composition can comprise additives such as inhibitors, chelating agents, etc. (see paragraphs 0206, 0207). As noted above, Osae et al. disclose the adhesive composition is a two-pack system wherein Part B comprises only peroxide initiator (catalyst) and part A comprises all the other components of adhesive (see paragraph 0216). Therefore, the additives such as inhibitors and/or chelating agents are necessarily present in Part A.
Regarding claim 13, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition as set forth above. Further, Osae et al. disclose adhesive composition can be used to bond the substrates (see paragraphs 0060). The substrates can be metal-based, layer, plastic sheet, etc. (see paragraph 0302). Accordingly, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose a laminate as presently claimed.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osae et al. (US 2012/0302695 A1 cited in IDS) in view of Briggs et al. (4,942,201 cited in IDS) as applied to claim 13 above, further in view of Vaufrey et al. (US 2011/0186871 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. disclose the two-part curable adhesive composition and the laminate as set forth above.
Osae et al. in view of Briggs et al. do not disclose an electronic device comprising the laminate.
Vaufrey et al. disclose a display device (electronic device) comprising a protective cap 7 made of plastic (plastic sheet) adhered to an adhesion promoter layer 10 made of aluminum oxide (metal-based layer) using a two-component acrylate adhesive 7a (see Figure 1 and paragraphs 0048, 0049 and 0053). The layers 7, 7a and 10 read on a laminate.
In light of the disclosure by Vaufrey of an electronic device comprising a laminate comprising a two-component acrylate adhesive, it therefore would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the two-part curable adhesive composition of Osae et al. to prepare a display device (electronic device) comprising a laminate made of plastic sheet adhered to metal-based layer using an adhesive layer obtained from the two-part curable adhesive composition, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRUPA SHUKLA whose telephone number is (571)272-5384. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/KRUPA SHUKLA/Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights