GLASS ARTICLES, METHODS FOR THE PRODUCTION THEREOF AND USES

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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 102, and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 102, and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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. Claim Comment The indicated allowability of claims 13 and 18 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to Dejneka et al., US 2009/0220761 A1 and Kawai, US 2011/0111260 A1. Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai, U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2011/0111260 A1 in view of Dejneka et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2009/0220761 A1. Kawai teaches an alkali aluminosilicate glass comprising in terms of mass%: 60-75% of SiO2, 5-18% of Al2O3, 3-10% of Li2O, 3-15% of Na2O, and 0.5-8% of ZrO2. Kawai further disclose that the glass comprises at least one of SO3, F, Cl, Br, and I in an amount of 1 mass% or less. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically, paragraphs [0012], [0015], and [0029]. Kawai teaches that the alkali aluminosilicate glass is free of As2O3 and Sb2O3. See paragraphs [0011] and [0028]. Kawai teach the size of the glass is not specifically limited and teaches thickness of 1 mm, 0.64 mm, and 0.4 mm. See paragraph [0039]. Kawai fails to teach that the aluminosilicate glass has a thickness of less than 250 µm as recited in instant claim 1. Dejneka et al. teaches a similar glass composition. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically paragraphs [0022], [0028], and [0029]. Dejneka et al. disclose that the glass can be formed into a sheet by methods, including down draw method, fusion method, and slot downdraw method. See paragraphs [0031]-[0034]. Dejneka et al. teach that the glass made by the down draw method can have a thickness of 0.1-3 mm (100 µm – 3 mm) (see paragraph [0040]), which reads on the glass article having a thickness of less than 250 µm, as recited in claim 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have an alkali aluminosilicate glass article of Kawai as suggested by Dejneka et al. because the resultant article would have the desired thickness while having excellent refining performance of the glass composition of Kawai. See paragraphs [0012], [0028], and [0029] of Kawai. Additionally, in regards to claim 1, Kawai teaches Examples 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, and 5-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on an aluminosilicate glass comprising at least 9 wt% of Na2O, 500 ppm to 8000 ppm with at least one halogen, less than 500 ppm of Sn, less than 100 ppm of As, less than 100 ppm of Sb as recited in claim 1. As to claim 2, Kawai is silent to the inclusion of platinum particles, which reads on the glass article comprising no more than 5 platinum particles per kilogram of glass as recited in instant claim 2. As to claim 3, Kawai teaches Examples 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, and 5-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the halogen being selected from chlorine, bromine, or iodine, as recited in instant claim 3. As to claim 4, Kawai teaches Examples 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 6-8, 6-9, and 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the glass comprising less than 100 ppm of boron, as recited in instant claim 4. As to claim 5, Kawai teaches that the glass comprises at least one fining agent selected from SO3, F, Cl, Br, and I (See paragraphs [0012] and [0029]), which reads on the glass comprising in addition to the at least one halogen the glass comprises fluorine in an amount of 0.05 to 0.5 wt%, as recited in instant claim 5. As to claim 6, Kawai teaches Examples 2-7, 2-8, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 5-6, 5-7, 6-8, 6-9, 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on at least one halogen in the range of 500-5000 ppm or Sn in amount less than 100 ppm, as recited in instant claim 3. As to claim 7, Kawai teaches Examples 2-7, 3-6, 3-7, 4-6, 4-7, 5-6, and 6-8 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the glass comprising at least one halogen in the amount of at most 2500 ppm, as recited in instant claim 7. As to claim 8, Kawai teaches the aluminosilicate glass comprises Li2O and Na2O and therefore is capable of being chemically hardened by ion exchange as recited in instant claim 8 and since the composition of the reference is the same as those claimed herein it follows that the glasses of Kawai would possess the diffusivity of at most 14 µm2/h as recited in claim 8. See MPEP 2112. It is well settled that when a claimed composition appears to be substantially the same as a composition disclosed in the prior art, the burden is properly upon the applicant to prove by way of tangible evidence that the prior art composition does not necessarily possess characteristics attributed to the CLAIMED composition. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 15 USPQ2d 1655 (Fed. Circ. 1990); In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980); In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 2109, 169 USPQ 226 (CCPA 1971). Products of identical composition may not have mutually exclusive properties. In re Spada 15 USPQ2d 1655,1658 (Fed. Circ. 1990). As to claim 9, since the composition of the reference is the same as those claimed herein it follows that the glasses of Kawai would possess the ratio between the temperature (TL) and the temperature (TB(NaCl)) of at most 1.2 as recited in claim 9. See MPEP 2112. As to claim 10, Kawai teaches Examples 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 6-8, 6-9, 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the glass comprising in terms of wt%: 40-75% of SiO2, 10-30% of Al2O3, 0-20% of B2O3, >0-30% of Li2O+Na2O+K2O, 0-25% of MgO+CaO+SrO+BaO+ZnO, 0-15% of TiO2+ZrO2, and 0-10% of P2O5 as recited in claim 10. As to claim 11, since the composition of the reference is the same as those claimed herein it follows that the glasses of Kawai would possess the beta-OH of at most 0.32 mm-1, as recited in instant claim 11. See MPEP 2112. As to claim 12, Kawai is silent on the inclusion of NH4+, which reads on the glass having less than 0.0001 wt% of NH4+ as recited in claim 12. As to claim 13, Kawai teaches Examples 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 5-6, and 5-7 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the glass having a quotient A in the range of 1.5 to 8.5, as recited in claim 13. As to claim 14, since the composition of the reference is the same as those claimed herein it follows that the glasses of Kawai would inherently possess a cooling state, as recited in claim 14. See MPEP 2112. Kawai teaches an alkali aluminosilicate glass comprising in terms of mass%: 60-75% of SiO2, 5-18% of Al2O3, 3-10% of Li2O, 3-15% of Na2O, and 0.5-8% of ZrO2. Kawai further disclose that the glass comprises at least one of SO3, F, Cl, Br, and I in an amount of 1 mass% or less. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically, paragraphs [0012], [0015], and [0029]. Kawai teaches that the alkali aluminosilicate glass is free of As2O3 and Sb2O3. See paragraphs [0011] and [0028]. Kawai teach the size of the glass is not specifically limited and teaches thickness of 1 mm, 0.64 mm, and 0.4 mm. See paragraph [0039]. Kawai fails to teach that the aluminosilicate glass has a thickness of less than 250 µm as recited in instant claim 15. Dejneka et al. teaches a similar glass composition. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically paragraphs [0022], [0028], and [0029]. Dejneka et al. disclose that the glass can be formed into a sheet by methods, including down draw method, fusion method, and slot downdraw method. See paragraphs [0031]-[0034]. Dejneka et al. teach that the glass made by the down draw method can have a thickness of 0.1-3 mm (100 µm – 3 mm) (see paragraph [0040]), which reads on the glass article having a thickness of less than 250 µm, as recited in claim 15. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have an alkali aluminosilicate glass article of Kawai as suggested by Dejneka et al. because the resultant article would have the desired thickness while having excellent refining performance of the glass composition of Kawai. See paragraphs [0012], [0028], and [0029] of Kawai. Additionally, in regards to claim 15, Kawai teaches Examples 1-6, 1-7, 1-8, 1-9, 1-10, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9, and 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on an aluminosilicate glass comprising at least 9 wt% of Na2O, 500 ppm to 8000 ppm with at least one halogen, less than 100 ppm of As, less than 100 ppm of Sb as recited in claim 15. Kawai is silent to the inclusion of platinum particles which reads on the glass having no more than 5 platinum particles per kilogram of glass as recited in instant claim 15. As to claim 16, Kawai teaches Examples 1-6, 1-7, 1-8, 1-9, 1-10, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9, and 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the glass comprising in terms of wt%: 40-75% of SiO2, 10-30% of Al2O3, 0-20% of B2O3, >0-30% of Li2O+Na2O+K2O, 0-25% of MgO+CaO+SrO+BaO+ZnO, 0-15% of TiO2+ZrO2, and 0-10% of P2O5 as recited in claim 16. As to claim 17, Kawai teaches Examples 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 5-6, and 5-7 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on an aluminosilicate glass having at least one halogen selected from chlorine, bromine, iodine, and combinations thereof in the range of 500-8000 ppm as recited in claim 17. Kawai teaches an alkali aluminosilicate glass comprising in terms of mass%: 60-75% of SiO2, 5-18% of Al2O3, 3-10% of Li2O, 3-15% of Na2O, and 0.5-8% of ZrO2. Kawai further disclose that the glass comprises at least one of SO3, F, Cl, Br, and I in an amount of 1 mass% or less. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically, paragraphs [0012], [0015], and [0029]. Kawai teaches that the alkali aluminosilicate glass is free of As2O3 and Sb2O3. See paragraphs [0011] and [0028]. Kawai teach the size of the glass is not specifically limited and teaches thickness of 1 mm, 0.64 mm, and 0.4 mm. See paragraph [0039]. Kawai fails to teach that the aluminosilicate glass has a thickness of less than 250 µm as recited in instant claim 18. Dejneka et al. teaches a similar glass composition. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically paragraphs [0022], [0028], and [0029]. Dejneka et al. disclose that the glass can be formed into a sheet by methods, including down draw method, fusion method, and slot downdraw method. See paragraphs [0031]-[0034]. Dejneka et al. teach that the glass made by the down draw method can have a thickness of 0.1-3 mm (100 µm – 3 mm) (see paragraph [0040]), which reads on the glass article having a thickness of less than 250 µm, as recited in claim 18. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have an alkali aluminosilicate glass article of Kawai as suggested by Dejneka et al. because the resultant article would have the desired thickness while having excellent refining performance of the glass composition of Kawai. See paragraphs [0012], [0028], and [0029] of Kawai. Additionally, in regards to claim 18, Kawai teaches Examples 3-8, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 5-6, and 5-7 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on an aluminosilicate glass comprising less than 500 ppm of Sn, less than 100 ppm of As, less than 100 ppm of Sb, and a quotient A of 1.5 to 8.5 as recited in claim 18. Kawai teaches an alkali aluminosilicate glass comprising in terms of mass%: 60-75% of SiO2, 5-18% of Al2O3, 3-10% of Li2O, 3-15% of Na2O, and 0.5-8% of ZrO2. Kawai further disclose that the glass comprises at least one of SO3, F, Cl, Br, and I in an amount of 1 mass% or less. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically, paragraphs [0012], [0015], and [0029]. Kawai teaches that the alkali aluminosilicate glass is free of As2O3 and Sb2O3. See paragraphs [0011] and [0028]. Kawai teach the size of the glass is not specifically limited and teaches thickness of 1 mm, 0.64 mm, and 0.4 mm. See paragraph [0039]. Kawai fails to teach that the aluminosilicate glass has a thickness of less than 250 µm as recited in instant claim 19. Dejneka et al. teaches a similar glass composition. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically paragraphs [0022], [0028], and [0029]. Dejneka et al. disclose that the glass can be formed into a sheet by methods, including down draw method, fusion method, and slot downdraw method. See paragraphs [0031]-[0034]. Dejneka et al. teach that the glass made by the down draw method can have a thickness of 0.1-3 mm (100 µm – 3 mm) (see paragraph [0040]), which reads on the glass article having a thickness of less than 250 µm, as recited in claim 19. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have an alkali aluminosilicate glass article of Kawai as suggested by Dejneka et al. because the resultant article would have the desired thickness while having excellent refining performance of the glass composition of Kawai. See paragraphs [0012], [0028], and [0029] of Kawai. Additionally, in regards to claim 19, Kawai teaches Examples 1-6, 1-7, 1-8, 1-9, 1-10, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9,2-10, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9, and 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on an aluminosilicate glass comprising at least 9 wt% of Na2O, less than 500 ppm of Sn, less than 100 ppm of As, less than 100 ppm of Sb as recited in claim 19. Since the composition and thickness of the reference is the same as those claimed herein it follows that the glasses of Kawai in view of Dejneka et al. would inherently possess the thickness variation of less than 5 µm as recited in claim 19. See MPEP 2112. As to claim 20, Kawai teaches Examples 1-6, 1-7, 1-8, 1-9, 1-10, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9,2-10, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9, and 6-10 (see Tables 1-6), which reads on the glass comprising in terms of wt%: 40-75% of SiO2, 10-30% of Al2O3, 0-20% of B2O3, >0-30% of Li2O+Na2O+K2O, 0-25% of MgO+CaO+SrO+BaO+ZnO, 0-15% of TiO2+ZrO2, and 0-10% of P2O5 as recited in claim 20. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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 Elizabeth A. Bolden whose telephone number is (571)272-1363. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am to 6:30 pm M-F. 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, Amber R. Orlando can be reached at 571-270-3149. 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. /Elizabeth A. Bolden/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731 EAB 14 April 2026