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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/30/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The recitation in claim 16, line 2 of “target patterns have a target center a color chrominance gradually” should be changed to --target patterns have a target center; a color chrominance gradually--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 14, and 19-21 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 Snell (10386161).
Regarding claim 1, Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches a target paper with double target pattern surfaces, comprising: a release paper (100) (Col. 4, Lines 66-67; Col. 5, Lines 1-9) with one surface having a release layer; and an adhesive paper (Fig. 3, Part No. 70) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55) stuck onto the release layer; wherein the adhesive paper has a first target pattern (Fig. 3, Part No. 68) on a surface of the adhesive paper opposite to the release layer of the release paper to define a first target-pattern surface (Col. 12, Lines 49-67); wherein the release paper has a second target pattern (46) (Col. 7, Lines 60-67; Col. 8, Lines 1-11), and an outer surface of the release layer on which the adhesive paper is stuck is provided with the second target pattern (Col. 7, Lines 60-67; Col. 8, Lines 1-11), and the second target pattern is covered by the adhesive paper (70) while the adhesive paper is stuck onto the release layer (Col. 12, Lines 49-55); wherein, in response to detachment of the adhesive paper from the release layer, the release paper exposes the second target pattern on the outer surface of the release layer to define a second target-pattern surface (Col. 12, Lines 49-55).
It is noted that Snell (Col. 12, Lines 49-55) discloses: “as illustrated in FIG. 3, the front side 32 of the splatter packs 12 and/or target panels may have different color indicia 64 (magenta, green, yellow), shape indicia 66 (circle, square, triangle and logo) and/or alphanumeric indicia 68 (letters and/or numbers) which may printed directly thereon or may be printed on stickers 70 and adhered to the splatter packs and/or the target panel”.
As an alternative rejection, it is noted that the claim recitations of “a first target pattern” and “a second target pattern” is directed to printed matter. To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship and the functional relationship must be new and unobvious. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404). Where a product merely serves as a support for printed matter, no functional relationship exists. In the instant case, the relationship between the printed matter (the target pattern) and the substrate is not new and obvious as it is known to have indicia on a target surface (See for example: Sharrock, Lee (20220146237), Tanoury (20220099415), Chia (20220074716), Ervin (20180010892), Gamez (20070262529), Mujic (5415415), Quick (20150235573)). Therefore, the printed matter is not given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 14, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches the release layer is a colored layer to constitute the second target pattern (See fig. 1-5).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches each of the first and second target patterns have a main target center (See Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches each of the first and second target patterns (See fig. 3) further comprise a plurality of auxiliary target centers, and the plurality of auxiliary target centers are arranged around the main target center (See fig. 3).
Regarding claim 21, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches the adhesive paper has two target sticker regions (See fig. 3), wherein the two target sticker regions include a main target sticker region having a main target sticker (70) and an auxiliary target sticker region having a plurality of auxiliary target stickers (70), wherein the main target sticker and the plurality of auxiliary target stickers are formed as independent split adhesive pieces (See fig. 3) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55).
Claim 15-17 and 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snell.
Regarding claim 15, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches the adhesive paper has a first target pattern (Fig. 3, Part No. 68) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55); and the release paper has a second target pattern (46) (Col. 7, Lines 60-67; Col. 8, Lines 1-11).
The modified Snell does not teach each of the first and second target patterns comprise at least two chromatic zones, and the chromatic zones have a same color type and different chrominances.
It is noted that the claim recitation of “each of the first and second target patterns comprise at least two chromatic zones, and the chromatic zones have a same color type and different chrominances” is directed to printed matter. To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship and the functional relationship must be new and unobvious. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404). Where a product merely serves as a support for printed matter, no functional relationship exists. In the instant case, the relationship between the printed matter (the target pattern) and the substrate is not new and obvious as it is known to have indicia on a target surface (See for example: Sharrock, Lee (20220146237), Tanoury (20220099415), Chia (20220074716), Ervin (20180010892), Gamez (20070262529), Mujic (5415415), Quick (20150235573)). Therefore, the printed matter is not given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 16, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches each of the first (Fig. 3, Part No. 68) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55) and second (46) target patterns have a target center (Col. 7, Lines 60-67; Col. 8, Lines 1-11).
The modified Snell does not teach a color chrominance gradually darkening or gradually lightening in a direction away from the target center.
It is noted that the claim recitation of “a color chrominance gradually darkening or gradually lightening in a direction away from the target center” is directed to printed matter. To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship and the functional relationship must be new and unobvious. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404). Where a product merely serves as a support for printed matter, no functional relationship exists. In the instant case, the relationship between the printed matter (the target pattern) and the substrate is not new and obvious as it is known to have indicia on a target surface (See for example: Sharrock, Lee (20220146237), Tanoury (20220099415), Chia (20220074716), Ervin (20180010892), Gamez (20070262529), Mujic (5415415), Quick (20150235573)). Therefore, the printed matter is not given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 17, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches the adhesive paper has a first target pattern (Fig. 3, Part No. 68) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55); and the release paper has a second target pattern (46) (Col. 7, Lines 60-67; Col. 8, Lines 1-11).
The modified Snell does not teach various regions of each of the first and second target patterns have different printing densities of pigment dots.
It is noted that the claim recitation of “various regions of each of the first and second target patterns have different printing densities of pigment dots” is directed to printed matter. To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship and the functional relationship must be new and unobvious. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404). Where a product merely serves as a support for printed matter, no functional relationship exists. In the instant case, the relationship between the printed matter (the target pattern) and the substrate is not new and obvious as it is known to have indicia on a target surface (See for example: Sharrock, Lee (20220146237), Tanoury (20220099415), Chia (20220074716), Ervin (20180010892), Gamez (20070262529), Mujic (5415415), Quick (20150235573)). Therefore, the printed matter is not given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 22, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches the two target sticker regions include a main target sticker region having a main target sticker (70) and an auxiliary target sticker region having a plurality of auxiliary target stickers (70) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55).
The modified Snell does not teach the main target sticker is a cross-shaped adhesive piece having a cross-shaped outer perimeter, and the auxiliary target stickers are disposed in spaces between adjacent extensions of the cross-shaped outer perimeter.
It is noted that the claim recitation of “the main target sticker is a cross-shaped adhesive piece having a cross-shaped outer perimeter” is directed to the shape of the sticker. Changing the shape of the stickers of the modified Snell to provide for a “cross shape” would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as a means of mere design choice (See: In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), where the court held that the configuration/shape of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant).
It is noted that the claim recitation of “the auxiliary target stickers are disposed in a spaces between adjacent extensions of the cross shaped outer perimeter” is directed to the placement of the stickers on different regions of a target. Moving the stickers of Snell to provide for stickers placed at specific regions of a target is merely a matter of re-arrangement of parts (See: In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)) (Snell: Col. 12, Lines 49-55).
Claims 2-4, 6-7, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snell in view of Potterfield (20080054570).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches a release paper (100) (Col. 4, Lines 66-67; Col. 5, Lines 1-9) with one surface having a release layer.
The modified Snell does not teach the release paper comprises a base paper layer, and the release layer is provided on a first surface of the base paper layer.
Potterfield (Figures 1-9) teaches the release paper comprises a base paper layer (Fig. 2A-2C, Part No. 206) (Para. 0033-0035), and the release layer (114) is provided on a first surface of the base paper layer (206) (Para. 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Snell with the release layer is provided on a first surface of the base paper layer as taught by Potterfield as a means of providing a target paper with multiple support layers (Potterfield: Para. 0033).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches a release paper (100) (Col. 4, Lines 66-67; Col. 5, Lines 1-9) with one surface having a release layer.
The modified Snell does not teach a second surface of the base paper layer which is opposite to the first surface of the base paper layer and not provided with the release layer is provided with another second target pattern.
Potterfield (Figures 1-9) teaches a second surface (204) of the base paper layer (206) (Para. 0033-0035) which is opposite to the first surface of the base paper layer and not provided with the release layer (114) is provided with another second target pattern (Para. 0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Snell with a second surface of the base paper layer which is opposite to the first surface of the base paper layer is provided with another second target pattern as taught by Potterfield as a means of providing a target paper with target patterns on opposite sides of the target paper (Potterfield: Para. 0035).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches a release paper (100) (Col. 4, Lines 66-67; Col. 5, Lines 1-9) with one surface having a release layer.
The modified Snell does not teach each of the first and second target patterns comprises at least two chromatic zones, and the chromatic zones have a same color type and different chrominances.
It is noted that the claim recitation of “each of the first and second target patterns comprises at least two chromatic zones, and the chromatic zones have a same color type and different chrominances” is directed to printed matter. To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship and the functional relationship must be new and unobvious. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404). Where a product merely serves as a support for printed matter, no functional relationship exists. In the instant case, the relationship between the printed matter (the target pattern) and the substrate is not new and obvious as it is known to have indicia on a target surface (See for example: Sharrock, Lee (20220146237), Tanoury (20220099415), Chia (20220074716), Ervin (20180010892), Gamez (20070262529), Mujic (5415415), Quick (20150235573)). Therefore, the printed matter is not given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 6, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches a release paper (100) (Col. 4, Lines 66-67; Col. 5, Lines 1-9) with one surface having a release layer.
The modified Snell does not teach each of the first and second target patterns have a main target center.
Potterfield (Figures 1-9) teaches each of the first and second target patterns have a main target center (Para. 0033-0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Snell with each of the first and second target patterns have a main target center as taught by Potterfield as a means of providing a target paper with target patterns on opposite sides of the target paper (Potterfield: Para. 0035).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches a release paper (100) (Col. 4, Lines 66-67; Col. 5, Lines 1-9) with one surface having a release layer.
Snell does not teach each of the first and second target patterns further comprise a plurality of auxiliary target centers, and the plurality of auxiliary target centers are arranged around the main target center.
Potterfield (Figures 1-9) teaches each of the first and second target patterns further comprise a plurality of auxiliary target centers (See fig. 1A), and the plurality of auxiliary target centers are arranged around the main target center (Para. 0034-0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Snell with each of the first and second target patterns further comprise a plurality of auxiliary target centers as taught by Potterfield as a means of providing a target paper with target patterns on opposite sides of the target paper (Potterfield: Para. 0034-0035).
Regarding claim 23, the modified Snell (Figures 1-10) teaches auxiliary target stickers (Fig. 3, Part No. 70) and main target stickers (70) (Col. 12, Lines 49-55).
The modified Snell does not teach after the main target sticker is shot to form a damaged region, at least one of the auxiliary target stickers is configured to be detached and adhered on the damaged region so that the main target sticker is reusable for further shooting.
It is noted that the claim recitation of “after the main target sticker is shot to form a damaged region, at least one of the auxiliary target stickers is configured to be detached and adhered on the damaged region so that the main target sticker is reusable for further shooting” is directed to the intended use of the claimed apparatus. The prior art of Boyer teaches a plurality of stickers that are fully capable of being used according to the recited intended use limitation. Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does (See: Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990)). A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (See: Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)). As an alternative rejection, the prior art of Potterfield is being used to teach covering a damaged region of a target so the target can be reused.
Potterfield (Figures 1-9) teaches covering a damaged region of a target so the target can be reused (Para. 0024, 0049-0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Snell with covering a damaged region of a target so the target can be reused as taught by Potterfield as a means of using replacement stickers to cover damaged portion of a target (Potterfield: Para. 0049-0050).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 6-7, 14-17, and 19-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER GLENN whose telephone number is (571)272-1277. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, EUGENE KIM can be reached at (571) 272-4463. 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.
/C.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/JOSEPH B BALDORI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights