DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are objected to because of the following informalities: (a) claim 18, “an” (L2) should be amended to read “the”; (b) claim 19, “an” (L2) should be amended to read “the”; and (c) claim 20, “an” (L3) should be amended to read “the”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
●a central adhesive tape suction assembly
claims 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20
●an end adhesive tape suction assembly
claims 1, 9, 10, 12, 16, 18, 19, 20
●an end driving member
claims 1, 9, 12, 18, 19, 20
●an end adhesive tape suction member
claims 1, 2, 4, 9, 12, 14, 18, 19, 20
●an end sliding assembly
claims 1, 9, 12, 18, 19, 20
●end limiting assembly
claim 2
●elastic member
claims 5, 15
●blocking member
claim 6
●auxiliary member
claims 7, 8
●translation mechanism
claims 10, 16
●adhesive tape attaching mechanism
claims 10, 11, 16, 17
●adhesive tape attachment limiting mechanism
claims 11, 17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim(s) 18-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 18-20 are considered to be indefinite when reciting that the pressing force is a “stable” pressing force (claims 18-19: L7; claim 20: L8) in that the claims and the specification do not define what constitutes a stable pressing force and/or criteria for a force to be stable. Thus, the scope of the claim cannot be determined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(S) 1-4, 9, 13-14, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sumi (US 4,909,891).
Claims 1, 9, and 18-19: Sumi teaches an adhesive tape attaching apparatus (ATAA) (Fig1) comprising an adhesive tape attaching mechanism (ATAM), the ATAM comprises:
●an assembly base (AB) (comprising at least laminator body 7)
●a central adhesive tape suction assembly (CATSA) (comprising at least items 15, 16, and
pieces of ATAA which operate therewith) disposed on the AB and capable of adsorbing (by way of suction) and attaching an adhesive tape (AT) (comprising at least a photosensitive resin layer with an adhesive surface) to a first surface (FS) of a workpiece (WP) (comprising at least insulating substate 11) to be adhered
●end adhesive tape suction assemblies (EATSA) disposed on the AB and arranged on
two opposite sides of the CATSA (above and below) wherein each of the EATSA comprises an end driving member (EDM) (comprising at least a rack and pinion mechanism) and an end adhesive tape suction member (EATSM) (comprising at least main vacuum plate 10) in transmission connection with the EDM.
●an end sliding assembly (ESA) (comprising at least guide member 7A) disposed on the AB.
Each of the EATSM is configured to be driven by the EDM, connected thereto, guided by the ESA to slide toward the CATSA for closing (for example – decreasing space between the CATSA and the EATSM), for clamping the WP with a force of pressure, and for adjusting a distance between the two EASTM to match a thickness of the WP to be adhered in that the two EASTM stop at the surface of the WP (Fig18). The force of pressure is controllable in that Sumi teaches a drive source for operation control (c5 L29-58). Each of the EATSM is capable of adsorbing (by way of suction), bending (by way of temporary bonding member 30 using suction), and attaching the AT to a second surface (SS) and a third surface (TS) of the WP to be adhered, respectively (see Fig18 Fig19 below, annotate). The SS and the TS are both arranged adjacent to the FS. The SS is arranged opposite to the TS:
PNG
media_image1.png
802
789
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
860
729
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
570
563
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(c3 L43-58; c5 L29 to c6 L2; c10 L64 to c11 L12; c12 L26-42; c13 L34 to c15 L38). Other locations within reference may be included in the above recited locations (paragraphs, drawing, abstract, claims) to demonstrate further the features in the reference as claimed in the instant claims.
With respect to claimed CATSA, EATSA, EDM, EATSM, and ESA, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for the CATSA, EATSA, EDM, EATSM, and ESA to perform the claimed functions. Sumi teaches structures for the CATSA, EATSA, EDM, EATSM, and ESA to perform the same claimed functions. Sumi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claim 2: Sumi teaches the ATAM according to claim 1 and the following:
●each of the EATSM is configured to have a first limit position (FLP) (temporary bonding
position) when moving toward the CATSA
●each of the EATSM is configured to have a second limit position (SLP) (Fig4) when
moving away from the CATSA
●each of the FLP is located between the SLP corresponding to the respective FLP and
the CATSM (Fig18: portion of CATSM below WP)
●the ATAM comprises an end limiting assembly (ELA) (comprising at least support
member 12)
●the ELA is disposed in the SLP (Fig1)
(c3 L43-58; c5 L29 to c6 L2; c10 L64 to c11 L12; c12 L26-42; c13 L34 to c15 L38).
With respect to claimed CATSA, EATSM, and ELA, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for the CATSA, EATSM, and ELA to perform the claimed functions. Sumi teaches structures for CATSA, EATSM, and ELA to perform the same claimed functions. Sumi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claims 3 and 13: Sumi teaches the ATAM according to claim 1 and the following:
●the CATSA comprises a support member (SM) (comprising at least rollers 16) and a central
adhesive tape suction member (CATSM) (comprising at least vacuum plates 15) – the SM being connected between the CATSM and the AB
●a surface of the CATSM faces the WP to be adhered is configured as a central
adhesive tape suction end face (CATSEF) (comprising at least a face of vacuum plates 15 with suction holes 15A)
●a surface of the SM facing the WP (Fig19) to be adhered is configured as a support
face (SF) (comprising at least the outer surface of rollers 16)
●the CATSEF is closer to the WP to be adhered than the SF (when CATSEF contacts WP a
portion of the outer surface of rollers 16 is not in contact with WP)
(c3 L43-58; c5 L29 to c6 L2; c10 L64 to c11 L12; c12 L26-42; c13 L34 to c15 L38).
With respect to claimed CATSA, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches a structure for the CATSA to perform the claimed function. Sumi teaches structures for CATSA to perform the same claimed function. Sumi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claims 4 and 14: Sumi teaches the ATAM according to claim 3 and the following:
●the SM is slidably disposed (SM is shifted into position: c10 L34-64) on the AB
●the SM is configured to drive the CATSM (by rotation) and to retract (carries CATSM
with it) relative to each of the EATSM – an force is applied to the SF as a normal
force from the WP there-below.
See: c3 L43-58; c5 L29 to c6 L2; c10 L64 to c11 L12; c12 L26-42; c13 L34 to c15 L38.
With respect to claimed EATSM, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches a structure for EATSM to perform the claimed function. Sumi teaches a structure for the EATSM to perform the same claimed function. Sumi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumi (US 4,909,891) in view of Gross (US 4,549,186).
Claims 12 and 20: the above discussion of Sumi applies herein. Sumi teaches a production line, as discussed above, having the ATAA. The WP is a printed circuit board which is further exposed for forming its features (c1 L1 to c2 L9; c15 L39-47; c3 L43-58; c5 L29 to c6 L2; c10 L64 to c11 L12; c12 L26-42; c13 L34 to c15 L38). Sumi does not refer to this as a “battery” production line. However, Gross teaches that it is conventional and well-known that printed circuit boards are combinable with batteries for various reason (printed circuit board 28 and battery 35: abstract; c3 L40-50). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have provided in Sumi that the printed circuits boards be made so as to be combinable with a chosen battery – and then combined with such battery (battery production line) – as suggested by Gross in that this expands the products that can be made by the production line of Sumi which may benefit Sumi financially.
With respect to claimed CATSA, EATSA, EDM, EATSM, and ESA, because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification teaches structures for the CATSA, EATSA, EDM, EATSM, and ESA to perform the claimed functions. Sumi teaches structures for the CATSA, EATSA, EDM, EATSM, and ESA to perform the same claimed functions. Sumi is thus considered to meet this limitation of the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 5-6, 7-8, 10-11, and 15-17 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 5 and 15, the closest prior art of record to Sumi, alone or in combination with the other prior art of record, does not teach or fairly suggest that the CATSA assembly further comprises an elastic member being in abutment between the AB and the CATSM, and that the elastic member is configured to store elastic potential energy for driving the CATSM to reset when the CATSM retracts.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 7, the closest prior art of record to Sumi, alone or in combination with the other prior art of record, does not teach or fairly suggest that the CATSA comprises an auxiliary member slidably disposed on the AB, that the CATSM is disposed on the auxiliary member, and that auxiliary member is configured to be movable relative to the AB along a retraction direction of the CATSM following the CATSM.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claims 10 and 16, the closest prior art of record to Sumi, alone or in combination with the other prior art of record, does not teach or fairly suggest that the ATAA further comprises a carrier body and a translation mechanism; at least one ATAM is provided; the translation mechanism and all the ATAM are disposed on the carrier body; and the translation mechanism is in transmission connection with the at least one ATAM and configured to drive the ATAM connected thereto to slide in a direction intersecting both an arrangement direction of the EATSA and an adhesive tape attachment direction of the CATSA.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The amendments and comments filed 12-4-25 and 3-2-26 have been entered and fully considered. In Sumi each of the EATSM is configured to be driven by the EDM, connected thereto, guided by the ESA to slide toward the CATSA for closing (for example – decreasing space between the CATSA and the EATSM), for clamping the WP with a force of pressure, and for adjusting a distance between the two EASTM to match a thickness of the WP to be adhered in that the two EASTM stop at the surface of the WP (Fig18). The force of pressure is controllable in that Sumi teaches a drive source for operation control (c5 L29-58).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LINDA GRAY whose telephone number is (571) 272-5778. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9 AM to 5:30 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, Phil Tucker can be reached at (571) 272-1095. 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.
/LINDA L GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745