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
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blau et al. (US 2004/0237325).
Regarding claims 1 and 3:
Blau discloses a tape 11 comprising an adhesive area 16 and adhesive areas 12 and 14 on opposite sides of the adhesive area 16, wherein the adhesive area 16 is weaker than adhesive areas 12 and 14 [abstract; 0002; 0020-0021; Fig. 3]. The tape further comprises a tab or graspable portion 18 which overlaps the low adhesive area 16 [0021-0023; 0030; claim 5].
While there is no disclosure that the tape is “a battery attachment tape” as presently claimed, Applicant's attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that “if the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction”. Further, MPEP 2111.02 states that statements in the preamble reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention must be evaluated to determine whether the purpose or intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
It is the examiner’s position that the preamble does not state any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations and further that the purpose or intended use, i.e., attaching the tape to a battery or battery cell, recited in the present claims does not result in a structural difference between the presently claimed invention and the prior art and further that the prior art structure which is a tape identical to that set forth in the present claims is capable of performing the recited purpose or intended use.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Long (CN 108485553).
Note: citations refer to the machine translation of CN ‘553 filed by Applicant on 12/16/2025.
Regarding claims 1, 3, 12, and 14:
Long discloses a battery protection film (tape) comprising a knob film (“diaphragm”) 2 (gripping portion) and a bonding film 1 (adhesive portion), wherein the bonding film 1 comprises strong adhesive areas 131 and 132, transition areas 121 and 122, and weak adhesive areas 111 and 112, and further wherein the knob film 2 overlaps the strong adhesive area 131, the first transition area 121, and the first weak adhesive area 111 (abstract; p2-3; Fig. 1). Thus, the tape has multiple first adhesive portions having second adhesive portions on opposite sides thereof.
Regarding claims 2 and 13:
Adhesive areas 131, 121, and 111 extend to both sides of the film 1 (Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 4, 6, 15, and 17:
The adhesive areas point-like (dot) glue areas that are equally spaced apart, wherein larger dot diameter is used for regions with higher adhesion (p3).
Regarding claims 7 and 18:
The adhesive areas are wider than knob film 2 (Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 9-10 and 19-20:
The strong adhesive areas 131, 132 have adhesive-free areas (p2; claim 7).
Regarding claim 11:
The strong adhesive areas can be provided in strips 1311, 1312 (p3; Fig. 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 5, 8, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Long (CN 108485553).
Regarding claims 5 and 16:
Long discloses a battery protection film as previously explained. Example diameters of point-like (dot) glue areas of 1.1 mm, 1 mm, and 0.8 mm, but further teaches that different diameters can be used to provide the desired adhesive force needed for a given end use (p3). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to vary the diameters of the dots, including over values presently claimed, to provide higher degrees of adhesion as needed for a desired end use.
Regarding claim 8:
Long teaches the width and shape of each adhesive area can be adjusted to provide the desired adhesive force needed for a given end use (p3). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to vary the area of the adhesive areas, including wherein a total area of a corresponding second adhesive portion is smaller than a total area of a corresponding first adhesive portion, to provide the adhesiveness needed for a desired end use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11-8PM 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, 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.
/JOHN D FREEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
