DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to communication received on 2/19/26.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The text of those sections of AIA 35 U.S.C. code not present in this action can be found in previous office actions dated 10/2/19, 4/14/20, 8/21/20, 2/2/21, 4/16/21, 6/24/21, 12/15/21, 6/22/22, 12/6/22, 5/24/23, 8/24/23, 1/31/24, 6/21/24, 1/23/25, 6/2/25 and 12/2/25.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/19/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER in view of Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, and Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY on claims 1, 2, 13 and 14 and 22 are withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, and Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY as applied to claim 1 further in view of Seto et al. WO 02/073250A2 hereinafter SETO on claim 3 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER further in view of Geissler et al. US PG Pub 201110293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY and Phillips et al. US Patent Number 5,135,812 hereinafter PHILLIPS on claim 4-5, 6 and 17 are withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY and Phillips et al. US Patent Number 5,135,812 hereinafter PHILLIPS as applied to claim 4 and further in view of Argoitia US Patent Number 7,667,895 hereinafter ARGOITIA1 on claim 7 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY, Phillips et al. US Patent Number 5,135,812 hereinafter PHILLIPS and Kawamoto et al. US Patent Number 7,438,245 hereinafter KAWAMOTO on claim 16 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER further in view of Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY and Decker US PGPub 2012/0007271 hereinafter DECKER on claims 4-6, 15 and 17 are withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY and Phillips et al. US Patent Number 5,135,812 hereinafter PHILLIPS as applied to claim 4 and further in view of Argoitia US Patent Number 7,667,895 hereinafter ARGOITIA1 on claim 7 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Geissler et al. US PG Pub 201110293547 hereinafter GEISSLER, Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY, Phillips et al. US Patent Number 5,135,812 hereinafter PHILLIPS, Decker US PGPub 201210007271 hereinafter DECKER and Kawamoto et al. US Patent Number 7,438,245 hereinafter KAWAMOTO on claim 16 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER further in view of Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER on claims 23, 8-9, 11, and 25-26 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 2009/0145332 hereinafter WHEELER further in view of Geissler et al. US PG Pub 2011/0293547 hereinafter GEISSLER as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Skudrzyk US Patent Number 4,951,865 hereinafter SKUDRZVK on claim 12 are withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER and Geissler et al. US PG Pub 201110293547 hereinafter GEISSLER as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Seto et al. WO 02I073250A2 hereinafter SETO on claims 19 is withdrawn because the independent claim has been amended.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 22, 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER in view of Donohue et al. US PGPub 2013/0068410 hereinafter DONOHUE and Wang et al. US PGPub 2014/0079922 hereinafter WANG.
As for claim 1, WHEELER teaches "the present invention provides a process of preparing flake products, the process comprising the steps of: (i) applying a flake precursor film to a substrate; (ii) subjecting the film to a flake-defining treatment; (iii) separating the flake portion and the non-flake portion of the film; and (iv) removing the flake portion of the film from the substrate" (paragraph 37), i.e. a method of forming a thin film device wherein the film has flakes defined in the flake-defining treatment, but are not separated from the substrate and non-flake portion to form flakes until steps (iii) and (iv) as it is separated and removed from the substrate.
WHEELER teaches "In one preferred embodiment, the substrate is or is on a continuous belt. A substrate that is or is on a continuous belt allows the entire process to be carried out under continuous operation, with the resulting economies of production" (paragraph 54, lines 1-4), "the flake precursor film is a multi-layer film, and is preferably made up of a number of layers of film of different refractive index" (paragraph 40, lines 1-3) and "above of applying a film to a substrate may involve forming a film on a substrate" (paragraph 39, lines 1-2), i.e. coating a front surface of a web with a multi-layer thin film, the web having a back surface that is opposite the front surface.
WHEELER teaches "In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by means of a jet of liquid or air at elevated pressure" (paragraph 56) i.e. dry stripping the multi-layer thin film by application of a flow of gas, air, or steam that has sufficient velocity to release the flakes of the multi-layer thin film from the web.
WHEELER also teaches "In one embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by mechanical means" (paragraph 55), i.e. releasing the multi-layer thin film from the web does not include the use of solvents.
WHEELER is silent on including: applying a mechanical force to the back surface of the web that results in a localized tension to crack the multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web to form flakes prior to application of the flow of gas, air or stream.
DONOHUE teaches “The invention enables thin film particles of a controlled shape and size to be generated directly upon release of a thin film coating from a textured Substrate upon which they are grown directly. The substrate comprises an array of discrete, steep sided plateaus of a selected size and shape, from which discrete particles of a corresponding shape and size are releasable usually by means of an intermediate release layer coating on the plateaus. The process is readily scalable for high volume production and permits monomodal or multimodal particle size distributions” (abstract, lines 1-10).
DONOHUE further teaches “Step c) may comprise stripping the particles by flexing the substrate, preferably around one or more rollers, or planar-faced bars, and may also include agitation and/or filtration” (paragraph 53, lines 1-4) and further shows in Fig. 27, the bar, i.e. knife, being applied to the back of the substrate.
Examiner does note that DONOHUE teaches using a solvent, however only describes this as a preferred embodiment.
WANG teaches “In another aspect, the invention provides a method for forming a coating material comprising particles of a first material dispersed in a carrier, wherein the particles comprise a plurality of bilayers and a porous structure, the method comprising… ( c) delaminating the porous coating from the substrate to form particles (paragraph 30).
WANG teaches “The porous coating is mechanically delaminated by scraping the substrate with a blade, or by flexing or bending the substrate, or by application of a stream of gas or liquid” (paragraph 60) wherein no solvent is used while the substrate is flexed.
Examiner also notes that GEISSLER teaches “In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by washing with a recovery liquid. Providing it does not react undesirably with the flakes, water or any common organic compound finding use as a solvent may be employed as a recovery liquid” (paragraph 57), wherein if the solvent were to interact undesirably with the flakes, it would not be used.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the particle forming method of DONOHUE in the process of WANG such that it includes including: applying a mechanical force to the back surface of the web that results in a localized tension to crack the multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web to form flakes before the application of the gas because DONOHUE teaches that such a process can produce controlled shapes of the particles, WANG establishes that such a flexing process does not require solvent and GEISSLER teaches that there are embodiments wherein solvent is not desired.
As for claim 2, WHEELER teaches "the flake precursor film is a multi-layer film, and is preferably made up of a number of layers of film of different refractive index. Properties such as optical properties of the flakes may be adjusted by varying the number of layers of film, the refractive index of each layer of film and/or the thickness of each layer" (paragraph 40, lines 1-6), i.e. wherein the multi-layer thin film includes 3 layers.
As for claim 22, WHEELER teaches "another embodiment the substrate may have a release layer" (paragraph 52, line 1-2), i.e. wherein there is an embodiment wherein there is no release layer such that wherein a release layer is not present between the web and a first layer of the multi-layer thin film.
As for claim 23, WHEELER teaches "the present invention provides a process of preparing flake products, the process comprising the steps of: (i) applying a flake precursor film to a substrate; (ii) subjecting the film to a flake-defining treatment; (iii) separating the flake portion and the non-flake portion of the film; and (iv) removing the flake portion of the film from the substrate" (paragraph 37), i.e. a method of forming a thin film device wherein the film has flakes defined in the flake-defining treatment, but are not separated from the substrate and non-flake portion to form flakes until steps (iii) and (iv) as it is separated and removed from the substrate.
WHEELER teaches "In one preferred embodiment, the substrate is or is on a continuous belt. A substrate that is or is on a continuous belt allows the entire process to be carried out under continuous operation, with the resulting economies of production" (paragraph 54, lines 1-4), "the flake precursor film is a multi-layer film, and is preferably made up of a number of layers of film of different refractive index" (paragraph 40, lines 1-3) and "above of applying a film to a substrate may involve forming a film on a substrate" (paragraph 39, lines 1-2), i.e. coating a front surface of a web with a multi-layer thin film, the web having a back surface that is opposite the front surface.
WHEELER teaches "another embodiment the substrate may have a release layer. One suitable substrate is paper, pre-coated by a release layer of dry Hi-Selan C- 200 polyvinyl alcohol, ( available from British Traders & Shippers Ltd.) deposited from aqueous solution" (paragraph 52, lines 1-5), i.e. wherein a water soluble release layer is present between the web and a first layer of the multi-layer thin film.
WHEELER teaches "In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by means of a jet of liquid or air at elevated pressure" (paragraph 56) i.e. releasing the multi-layer thin film from the web without the use of solvents, wherein releasing the multi-layer thin film comprises… dry stripping the cracked multi-layer thin film by application of a flow of gas, air, or steam that has sufficient velocity to release the flakes of the cracked multi-layer thin film from the web.
WHEELER is silent on applying a mechanical force to the back surface of the web that results in a localized tension to the back surface of the web to crack the multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web to form flakes.
WHEELER does teach "In one embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by mechanical means. Suitable mechanical means include using ultrasonics or a scraping device such as a doctor blade" (paragraph 55, lines 1-4), i.e. the mechanical means of separating the flake portion of the film from the substrate forms the flakes.
DONOHUE teaches “The invention enables thin film particles of a controlled shape and size to be generated directly upon release of a thin film coating from a textured Substrate upon which they are grown directly. The substrate comprises an array of discrete, steep sided plateaus of a selected size and shape, from which discrete particles of a corresponding shape and size are releasable usually by means of an intermediate release layer coating on the plateaus. The process is readily scalable for high volume production and permits monomodal or multimodal particle size distributions” (abstract, lines 1-10).
DONOHUE further teaches “Step c) may comprise stripping the particles by flexing the substrate, preferably around one or more rollers, or planar-faced bars, and may also include agitation and/or filtration” (paragraph 53, lines 1-4) and further shows in Fig. 27, the bar, i.e. knife, being applied to the back of the substrate.
Examiner does note that DONOHUE teaches using a solvent, however only describes this as a preferred embodiment.
WANG teaches “In another aspect, the invention provides a method for forming a coating material comprising particles of a first material dispersed in a carrier, wherein the particles comprise a plurality of bilayers and a porous structure, the method comprising… ( c) delaminating the porous coating from the substrate to form particles (paragraph 30).
WANG teaches “The porous coating is mechanically delaminated by scraping the substrate with a blade, or by flexing or bending the substrate, or by application of a stream of gas or liquid” (paragraph 60) wherein no solvent is used while the substrate is flexed.
Examiner also notes that GEISSLER teaches “In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by washing with a recovery liquid. Providing it does not react undesirably with the flakes, water or any common organic compound finding use as a solvent may be employed as a recovery liquid” (paragraph 57), wherein if the solvent were to interact undesirably with the flakes, it would not be used.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the particle forming method of DONOHUE in the process of WANG such that it includes applying a mechanical force to the back surface of the web that results in a localized tension to the back surface of the web to crack the multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web to form flakes before the application of the gas because DONOHUE teaches that such a process can produce controlled shapes of the particles, WANG establishes that such a flexing process does not require solvent and GEISSLER teaches that there are embodiments wherein solvent is not desired.
As for claim 25, WHEELER teaches "another embodiment the substrate may have a release layer. One suitable substrate is paper, pre-coated by a release layer of dry Hi-Selan C-200 polyvinyl alcohol, ( available from British Traders & Shippers Ltd.) deposited from aqueous solution" (paragraph 52, lines 1-5), i.e. wherein the water soluble release layer comprises polyvinyl alcohol.
As for claim 26, WHEELER is silent on the knife.
DONOHUE teaches “The invention enables thin film particles of a controlled shape and size to be generated directly upon release of a thin film coating from a textured Substrate upon which they are grown directly. The substrate comprises an array of discrete, steep sided plateaus of a selected size and shape, from which discrete particles of a corresponding shape and size are releasable usually by means of an intermediate release layer coating on the plateaus. The process is readily scalable for high volume production and permits monomodal or multimodal particle size distributions” (abstract, lines 1-10).
DONOHUE further teaches “Step c) may comprise stripping the particles by flexing the substrate, preferably around one or more rollers, or planar-faced bars, and may also include agitation and/or filtration” (paragraph 53, lines 1-4) and further shows in Fig. 27, the bar, i.e. knife, being applied to the back of the substrate.
Examiner does note that DONOHUE teaches using a solvent, however only describes this as a preferred embodiment.
WANG teaches “In another aspect, the invention provides a method for forming a coating material comprising particles of a first material dispersed in a carrier, wherein the particles comprise a plurality of bilayers and a porous structure, the method comprising… ( c) delaminating the porous coating from the substrate to form particles (paragraph 30).
WANG teaches “The porous coating is mechanically delaminated by scraping the substrate with a blade, or by flexing or bending the substrate, or by application of a stream of gas or liquid” (paragraph 60) wherein no solvent is used while the substrate is flexed.
Examiner also notes that GEISSLER teaches “In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by washing with a recovery liquid. Providing it does not react undesirably with the flakes, water or any common organic compound finding use as a solvent may be employed as a recovery liquid” (paragraph 57), wherein if the solvent were to interact undesirably with the flakes, it would not be used.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the particle forming method of DONOHUE in the process of WANG such that it includes wherein the mechanical force is applied with the assistance of a knife in contact with the back surface of the web before the application of the gas because DONOHUE teaches that such a process can produce controlled shapes of the particles, WANG establishes that such a flexing process does not require solvent and GEISSLER teaches that there are embodiments wherein solvent is not desired.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Donohue et al. US PGPub 2013/0068410 hereinafter DONOHUE and Wang et al. US PGPub 2014/0079922 hereinafter WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seto et al. WO 02/073250A2 hereinafter SETO.
As for claim 3, WHEELER, GEISSLER and JOSEPHY are silent on wherein the multi-layer thin film includes a Fabry-Perot structure.
SETO teaches "The invention discloses magnetic OVP, said pigment consisting of thin-layer flakes having a basic metal-dielectric-metal structure to result in a viewing angle dependent color appearance, and having, in addition to said viewing-angle dependent O color appearance, incorporated magnetic properties, to make them distinguishable from OVP of similar appearance but not having said magnetic properties" (abstract, lines 1-4).
SETO further teaches "Very brilliant colors are obtained with a first type of OVP, made by physical vapor deposition. This type of OVP is constructed as a thin-film vapor deposited Fabry-Perot resonator stack. Simple-sandwich metal-dielectric-metal, as well as double- sandwich metal-dielectric-metal-dielectric-metal layer sequences are described in the prior art. The top metal layer(s) must be partially reflecting/ partially transparent, such that light can be coupled in and out of the Fabry-Perot resonator stack" (page 1, lines 1-9).
SETO further teaches "Optically variable devices of various types are used as an efficient anti-copy means on bank notes and security documents. A large part of the world-wide printed currency relies on such optically variable copy protection devices, and among these, features printed with optically variable ink (OVI™) have acquired a preeminent position since their first appearance on currency in 1987. Optically variable pigment (OVP) shows a viewing-angle dependent color appearance which cannot be reproduced by color copying equipment" (page 1, lines 13-21 ).
SETO teaches "Figure 3, shows the schematic layer sequence of a. second preferred embodiment of a magnetic OVP according to the present invention. Said magnetic OVP comprises one absorber layer 1, one dielectric layer 2 and at least one magnetic layer 4 being adjacent to one reflector layer 4. In this embodiment, a 4-layer design is required. Preferably, on a release-coated R carrier foil C, an absorber layer 1 of chromium is deposited, followed by a dielectric layer 2 of magnesium fluoride and a reflector layer 3 of aluminum. A magnetic layer 4 of magnetic material is deposited at last" (page 7, lines 11-20).
SETO further teaches "It can subsequently be detached from its carrier and comminuted into a pigment" (page 2, lines 11-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the Fabry Perot structure of SETO onto the release-coated web of WHEELER such that wherein the multi-layer thin film includes a Fabry-Perot structure to form a pigment because SETO teaches that flakes made of such a structure have view-angle dependent color appearance that cannot be reproduced and useful in security applications.
Claim(s) 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Donohue et al. US PGPub 2013/0068410 hereinafter DONOHUE and Wang et al. US PGPub 2014/0079922 hereinafter WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY.
As for claim 13, WHEELER, DONOHUE and WANG are specifically silent on the multi-layer thin film comprising a first layer, a reflector layer on the first layer, and a second layer on the reflector layer comprising a metal or metal alloy.
However, WHEELER does teach “The film may be coated with more than one layer of metal and/or metal compound. The coating material used in each layer is independently selected from metals and metal compounds such that the layers may be of the same metal or metal compound or a combination of different metals and/or metal compounds. The thickness of each coating layer may also vary. Properties, such as optical properties, of the flake products may be adjusted by varying the number oflayers of coating, the coating material used in each layer and/or the thickness of each layer. Thus different colour effects may be achieved” (paragraph 98).
JOSEPHY teaches "Alternating layers of materials can be applied to the moving PET web. One example is a solvent-soluble polymer organic or inorganic material (about 200 to about 400 angstroms), followed by a layer of metal such as 50 aluminum (150 to 250 angstroms), followed by another layer of the solvent-soluble coating" (column 2, lines 46-51 ), and that "This process has proved highly successful in producing extremely thin metal flakes of high aspect ratio and high specular reflectance" (column 4, lines 1-3), and "Inorganic materials such as oxides and fluorides can be deposited so as to produce protective coatings or thin layers that can be separated and made into flakes. Such coatings include magnesium fluoride, silicon monoxide, silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, aluminum fluoride, indium tin oxide and titanium dioxide" (column 6, lines 4-9), wherein the metallic layers applied have reflective properties and a protective layer can be applied around those layer and thus first, i.e. the multi-layer thin film comprising a first layer, a reflector layer on the first layer, and a second layer on the reflector layer comprising a metal or metal alloy.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the multi-layer thin film comprising a first layer, a reflector layer on the first layer, and a second layer on the reflector layer comprising a metal or metal alloy in the process of WHEELER because JOSE PHY teaches that such a stack of material produces extremely thin metal flakes of high aspect ratio and high specular reflectance.
As for claim 14, WHEELER does teach “The film or flakes may be coated by well-known wet chemistry techniques or alternatively by well-known vacuum deposition techniques” (paragraph 95), but is silent on what those techniques are specifically.
WANG teaches “Any convenient application method may be used, including but not limited to, Meyer-rod coating, gravure coating, slot die coating, spin coating, dipping methods, sputtering, spray coating and vapor deposition, and combinations thereof” (paragraph 137, lines 2-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use slot die coating and vacuum physical or chemical vapor deposition to apply the layers of WHEELER such that it includes wherein the first layer, the reflector layer and the second layer are independently applied using a process under vacuum chosen from physical vapor deposition and chemical vapor deposition because WHEELER teaches any known method can be used to form its flakes and WANG establishes such methods were well-known to form film to be made into flakes.
Claim(s) 4-5, 6-7, 9, 11, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER in view of Donohue et al. US PGPub 2013/0068410 hereinafter DONOHUE, Wang et al. US PGPub 2014/0079922 hereinafter WANG, and Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY.
As for claim 4, WHEELER teaches "the present invention provides a process of preparing flake products, the process comprising the steps of: (i) applying a flake precursor film to a substrate; (ii) subjecting the film to a flake-defining treatment; (iii) separating the flake portion and the non-flake portion of the film; and (iv) removing the flake portion of the film from the substrate" (paragraph 37), i.e. a method of forming a thin film device wherein the film has flakes defined in the flake-defining treatment, but are not separated from the substrate and non-flake portion to form flakes until steps (iii) and (iv) as it is separated and removed from the substrate.
WHEELER teaches "In one preferred embodiment, the substrate is or is on a continuous belt. A substrate that is or is on a continuous belt allows the entire process to be carried out under continuous operation, with the resulting economies of production" (paragraph 54, lines 1-4), "the flake precursor film is a multi-layer film, and is preferably made up of a number of layers of film of different refractive index" (paragraph 40, lines 1-3) and "above of applying a film to a substrate may involve forming a film on a substrate" (paragraph 39, lines 1-2), i.e. coating a front surface of a web with a first layer ... the web having a back surface that is opposite the front surface ... coating the first layer with another layer ... coating the another layer with a second layer to form a multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web.
WHEELER also teaches "In one aspect, the process of the present invention further comprises the step of coating the film with metal and/or a metal compound" (paragraph 88, lines 1-3), i.e. wherein layer comprising a metal or metal alloy.
WHEELER is silent on a reflector layer… coating the reflector layer with a second layer, wherein the first layer, the reflector layer and the second layer form a multi-layer thin film.
However, WHEELER does teach “The film may be coated with more than one layer of metal and/or metal compound. The coating material used in each layer is independently selected from metals and metal compounds such that the layers may be of the same metal or metal compound or a combination of different metals and/or metal compounds. The thickness of each coating layer may also vary. Properties, such as optical properties, of the flake products may be adjusted by varying the number of layers of coating, the coating material used in each layer and/or the thickness of each layer. Thus different colour effects may be achieved” (paragraph 98).
JOSEPHY teaches "Alternating layers of materials can be applied to the moving PET web. One example is a solvent-soluble polymer organic or inorganic material (about 200 to about 400 angstroms), followed by a layer of metal such as 50 aluminum (150 to 250 angstroms), followed by another layer of the solvent-soluble coating" (column 2, lines 46-51 ), and that "This process has proved highly successful in producing extremely thin metal flakes of high aspect ratio and high specular reflectance" (column 4, lines 1-3), and "Inorganic materials such as oxides and fluorides can be deposited so as to produce protective coatings or thin layers that can be separated and made into flakes. Such coatings include magnesium fluoride, silicon monoxide, silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, aluminum fluoride, indium tin oxide and titanium dioxide" (column 6, lines 4-9), wherein the metallic layers applied have reflective properties and a protective layer can be applied around those layer and thus first, i.e. the multi-layer thin film comprising a first layer, a reflector layer on the first layer, and a second layer on the reflector layer comprising a metal or metal alloy.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the multi-layer thin film comprising a first layer, a reflector layer on the first layer, and a second layer on the reflector layer comprising a metal or metal alloy in the process of WHEELER because JOSE PHY teaches that such a stack of material produces extremely thin metal flakes of high aspect ratio and high specular reflectance.
WHEELER teaches "In one embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by mechanical means. Suitable mechanical means include using ultrasonics or a scraping device such as a doctor blade" (paragraph 55, lines 1 -4) and "In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by means of a jet of liquid or air at elevated pressure" (paragraph 56) i.e. releasing the multi-layer thin film from the web by a dry technique and without the use of solvents; wherein the dry technique includes ... applying a flow of gas, air, or steam that has sufficient velocity to release the flakes of the multi-layer thin film from the web.
WHEELER is silent on wherein the dry technique includes applying a mechanical force to the back surface of the web that results in a localized tension to crack the multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web. However, as noted above, WHEELER teaches that its flakes are not formed during the separation from the substrate.
DONOHUE teaches “The invention enables thin film particles of a controlled shape and size to be generated directly upon release of a thin film coating from a textured Substrate upon which they are grown directly. The substrate comprises an array of discrete, steep sided plateaus of a selected size and shape, from which discrete particles of a corresponding shape and size are releasable usually by means of an intermediate release layer coating on the plateaus. The process is readily scalable for high volume production and permits monomodal or multimodal particle size distributions” (abstract, lines 1-10).
DONOHUE further teaches “Step c) may comprise stripping the particles by flexing the substrate, preferably around one or more rollers, or planar-faced bars, and may also include agitation and/or filtration” (paragraph 53, lines 1-4) and further shows in Fig. 27, the bar, i.e. knife, being applied to the back of the substrate.
Examiner does note that DONOHUE teaches using a solvent, however only describes this as a preferred embodiment.
WANG teaches “In another aspect, the invention provides a method for forming a coating material comprising particles of a first material dispersed in a carrier, wherein the particles comprise a plurality of bilayers and a porous structure, the method comprising… ( c) delaminating the porous coating from the substrate to form particles (paragraph 30).
WANG teaches “The porous coating is mechanically delaminated by scraping the substrate with a blade, or by flexing or bending the substrate, or by application of a stream of gas or liquid” (paragraph 60) wherein no solvent is used while the substrate is flexed.
Examiner also notes that GEISSLER teaches “In another embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by washing with a recovery liquid. Providing it does not react undesirably with the flakes, water or any common organic compound finding use as a solvent may be employed as a recovery liquid” (paragraph 57), wherein if the solvent were to interact undesirably with the flakes, it would not be used.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the particle forming method of DONOHUE in the process of WANG such that it includes wherein the dry technique includes applying a mechanical force to the back surface of the web that results in a localized tension to crack the multi-layer thin film on the front surface of the web with application of the gas because DONOHUE teaches that such a process can produce controlled shapes of the particles, WANG establishes that such a flexing process does not require solvent and GEISSLER teaches that there are embodiments wherein solvent is not desired.
As for claim 5, WHEELER teaches "the flakes recovered as flake products at stage" (paragraph 54, lines 7-8), i.e. further comprising collecting the released flakes of the multilayer thin film.
As for claim 6, WHEELER teaches "According to one embodiment, the flake precursor film is milled. This may take place before or after the flake defining treatment, before or after the separation step, and before or after coating. In this embodiment it may be advantageous if the film is applied to substrate that is or is on the moving rolls of a roll mill... Incidentally, milling will of course change the particle size of the flakes and it may also affect the particle size distribution" (paragraph 62-65), i.e. further comprising grinding the released flakes of the multi-layer thin film.
As for claim 7, WHEELER is specifically silent on wherein the first layer and the second layer are each independently a composite organic/inorganic layer
However, WHEELER does teach “Examples of suitable non-metal flake precursors include precursors of glass flakes such as sol gels, low melt temperature glass or other ceramic compositions, organic silicates such as tetraethyl orthosilicate, inorganic silicates, such as alkali metal silicates and other film-forming inorganic compounds, solid and liquid resins and polymers, solutions such as resin or polymer solutions and precursors of synthetic bismuth oxychloride flakes such as bismuth nitrate” (paragraph 31), wherein the flakes are make of a composite organic/inorganic layer.
WHEELER also teaches “Properties, such as optical properties, of the flake products may be adjusted by varying the number of layers of coating, the coating material used in each layer and/or the thickness of each layer. Thus different colour effects may be achieved” (paragraph 98, lines 7-11)/
DONOHUE teaches “The flake may be formed from any suitable film-forming material and may, for example, be inorganic, organic and/or metallic in nature and may be single layered or multi-layered” (paragraph 8, lines 8-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the first layer and the second layer are each independently a composite organic/inorganic layer in the process of WHEELER because WHEELER teaches that each layer can be chosen to provide a desired optical effect and DONOHUE establishes that composite layers can be formed when making flake particles.
As for claim 9, WHEELER teaches "In one embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by mechanical means. Suitable mechanical means include using ultrasonics or a scraping device such as a doctor blade" (paragraph 55, lines 1-4), i.e. wherein the dry technique includes an ultrasonic application.
As for claim 11, WHEELER teaches "In one embodiment the optionally coated flakes are removed from the substrate by mechanical means. Suitable mechanical means include using ultrasonics or a scraping device such as a doctor blade" (paragraph 55, lines 1-4), i.e. wherein the dry technique is applied while a vibrational force is applied.
As for claim 15, WHEELER does teach “The film or flakes may be coated by well-known wet chemistry techniques or alternatively by well-known vacuum deposition techniques” (paragraph 95), but is silent on what those techniques are specifically.
WANG teaches “Any convenient application method may be used, including but not limited to, Meyer-rod coating, gravure coating, slot die coating, spin coating, dipping methods, sputtering, spray coating and vapor deposition, and combinations thereof” (paragraph 137, lines 2-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use slot die coating and vacuum physical or chemical vapor deposition to apply the layers of WHEELER such that it includes wherein the first layer, the reflector layer and the second layer are independently applied using a process under vacuum chosen from physical vapor deposition and chemical vapor deposition because WHEELER teaches any known method can be used to form its flakes and WANG establishes such methods were well-known to form film to be made into flakes.
As for claim 17, WHEELER teaches "In one preferred aspect, the flake precursor film is a multi-layer film, and is preferably made up of a number of layers of film of different refractive index. Properties such as optical properties of the flakes may be adjusted by varying the number of layers of film, the refractive index of each layer of film and/or the thickness of each layer" (paragraph 40, lines 1 -6) and "precursors of glass flakes such as sol gels, low melt temperature glass or other ceramic compositions, organic silicates such as tetraethyl orthosilicate, inorganic silicates, such as alkali metal silicates and other film-forming inorganic compounds, solid and liquid resins and polymers, solutions such as resin or polymer solutions and precursors of synthetic bismuth oxychloride flakes such as bismuth nitrate" (paragraph 31 ), i.e. wherein the first layer and the second layer each independently include at least one of ... inorganic high index dielectric particles ... inorganic low index dielectric particles.
As for claim 25, WHEELER teaches "another embodiment the substrate may have a release layer. One suitable substrate is paper, pre-coated by a release layer of dry Hi-Selan C-200 polyvinyl alcohol, ( available from British Traders & Shippers Ltd.) deposited from aqueous solution" (paragraph 52, lines 1-5), i.e. wherein the water-soluble release layer comprises polyvinyl alcohol.
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler US PG Pub 200910145332 hereinafter WHEELER, Donohue et al. US PGPub 2013/0068410 hereinafter DONOHUE, Wang et al. US PGPub 2014/0079922 hereinafter WANG, and Josephy et al. US Patent Number 6,398,999 hereinafter JOSEPHY as applied to claim 4 and 6 above, and further in view of Kawamoto et al. US Patent Number 7,438,245 hereinafter KAWAMOTO.
As for claim 16, WHEELER teaches "According to one embodiment, the flake precursor film is milled. This may take place before or after the flake defining treatment, before or after the separation step, and before or after coating. In this embodiment it may be advantageous if the film is applied to substrate that is or is on the moving rolls of a roll mill. ... Incidentally, milling will of course change the particle size of the flakes and it may also affect the particle size distribution" (paragraph 62-65).
WHEELER is silent on wherein the grinding is a process chosen from jet mill, cryogenic grinding, ultrasonic grinding on liquid media, pulverizing, and high sheer wet grinding.
JOSEPHY is silent on wherein the grinding is a process chosen from jet mill.
JOSEPHY does teach that after removal from the support substrate "The multilayer sheet is then introduced directly into a solvent with or without suitable agitation to produce flakes; or it can be ground to rough flakes which can also be air milled to further reduce particle size" (column 3, lines 1-5), i.e. grinding the particles with air process.
KAWAMOTO further teaches "shows a typical construction of conventional jet mills. As shown in FIG. 1, coarse toner particles A to be milled are fed from inlet 13 of collision mill 11 into injection nozzle 12. High pressure air Bis fed into injection nozzle 12, thereby the coarse toner particles flow with the stream of the 45 high pressure air under higher velocities, then collide with collision plate 15 and are m ii led into finer particles" (column 1, lines 41-47) and further "The velocity of gas stream at the outlet of the gas nozzle is preferably 50 to 350 m/sec" (column 9, lines 21-22), i.e. wherein the jet mill is air milling.
Therefore, KAWAMOTO illustrates that JOSEPHYs air milling inherently teaches wherein the grinding is a process chosen from jet mill.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include jet milling in the process of WHEELER because JOSEPHY teaches that such a process can reduce the particle to a desired size.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11, 13-17, 19, 22-23, and 25-26 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 KRISTEN A DAGENAIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1114. The examiner can normally be reached 8-12 and 1-5.
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, Dah Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/KRISTEN A DAGENAIS/ Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights