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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 18, 2026 has been entered.
The amendment filed with the RCE submission of February 18, 2026 has been received and entered. With the entry of the amendment, claims 3, 11, 14, 19 and 22 are canceled, claims 12-13, 15-18, 20-21 and 23-25 are withdrawn and claims 1-2, 4-10, 26 and new claim 27 are pending for examination
Election/Restrictions
Claims 12-13, 15-18, 20-21 and 23-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on April 14, 2025. The Examiner notes that claim 21 is grouped with claim 20 as an optical film product depending from claim 20.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 27 has been added and requires that the formed metallic layer “is optically opaque”. Applicant refers to support for the amendment at page 8, lines 23-35 of the specification. However, this section and the disclosure as filed do not specifically provide that the formed metallic layer is “optically opaque” and thus the claim contains new matter.
The rejection of claims 1-2, 4-10 and 26 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 is withdrawn due to the amendments and arguments provided February 18, 2026.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2010/126110 (hereinafter ‘110, note document provided with the IDS of February 18, 2026 and the translation provided with this action) in view of Liu et al (US 2010/0201242), Kolics et al (US 2009/0288594), Shimizu (US 2014/0083745) and Sager et al (US 2006/0062902).
Claims 1, 7: ‘110 teaches a method of manufacturing an optical film (a wire grid polarizer which would thus have optical effects, shown in film form, so considered an optical film, note figures 2, 5, pages 2-3, translation, for example). The process includes providing a base film (note substrate 14 with ribs/ridges/structures 12) where the substrate 14 would have a first surface and second surface disposed opposite the first surface, and disposed on the first surface would be polymeric layer/structures extending from a base portion of the polymeric layer, where each of the plurality of structures defines an upper surface and at least one side surface extending from the corresponding upper surface to the base portion (note figure 2, page 7, translation, note polymer for base material at page 4, translation). A metallic layer is formed on at least one side surface of each of the plurality of structures (note underlayer/base layer 24, which can be aluminum, aluminum alloy, etc. figure 2, pages 5, 7, translation, and can be 3-15 nm thickness, page 6, translation). The metallic layer is treated to reduce reflection from a major surface of the metallic layer (note figure 2, pages 5, 7, translation, where absorption/absorbing layer 22 applied over the layer 24, indicated as providing lowered reflectance for the polarizer), and as well at pages 4-5, translation, aluminum and aluminum alloy described) as material for a reflective layer, so the absorption layer understood to have a lowered reflectance as compared to aluminum, etc. (since absorbs more light than the metal material of the first reflection layer, which can be the same material as the underlayer as noted above).
(A) As to specifically providing the polymer layer disposed on the first surface of the substrate, by a process such as microreplication (claim 7), ‘110 indicates that the base material with structures can be formed using a molding process (note pages 5-6, translation).
As to forming the base film, with the substrates, and structures, for example, by micro-replication, Liu indicates how a base film with substrates and similar structures (note base 214 and structures 212, and non-transmissive regions 210, figure 2, 0014), can be formed by a micro-replication process (note 0030), where the base film and structures 212, 214 can be made from polymer (note 0039-0040). The micro-replication process can include providing a base (substrate layer) and contacting with a bead of polymerizable composition and master mold with structures, which would form a substate with a base portion from which structures extend (note 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 to provide the base film with substrates and structures by micro-replication as suggested by Liu with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘110 wants such base films for use, and Liu, as discussed above, would indicate that similar such base films can be formed by micro-replications using polymers, and thus would give the desired layers and structure as claimed as discussed for Liu above.
(B) ‘110 does not teach forming the metallic layers by depositing a catalyst material on each of the plurality of structures and the base portion to form a catalyst layer thereon, selectively removing the catalyst layer from the upper surface of each of the plurality of structures and base portion while retaining an activity of the catalyst layer on the at least one side surface of each of the plurality of structures and the forming the metallic layer on the at least one side surface of each of the plurality of structures by electroless metal growth due to a reaction between the catalyst layer and one or more reagents. ‘110 does indicate that the metallic layer (underlayer) can be applied by a vapor process such as PVD or CVD process, where the thickness can be measured in nanometers (note page 6, translation), where there is depositing a material on each of the plurality of structures (note figure 2, layer 24), and as shown it is desired to have the layer on sidewalls and not on the top or base portion/groove between the structures (note figure 2). The applied material for layer 24 can be a metal such as aluminum or aluminum alloy, for example (note page 5, translation).
However, Kolics notes that various processes can be used to deposit metal, such as copper, etc. onto the surface of electronic components, including electroless plating and chemical vapor deposition (CVD), where electroless plating can be used to deposit thin metal layers or features, and is advantageous over other plating techniques because the metal is uniformly deposited and evenly coated on all surfaces (note 0003, 0005), and that electroless deposition is typically carried out by first “activating” the surface of the component by seeding or depositing a substance that will promote metal deposition (that is, apply a catalyst) (note 0004), but seeding may not be necessary if the substrate has palladium or cobalt, etc. (note 0004, that is palladium would be a catalyst for plating, and more not needed if already present). The seeding is typically accomplished by immersing the component in a solution containing a seeding agent, and following activation, the component is typically immersed in a solution that contains metal ions and a reducing agent, which reducing agent provides a source of electrons for the metal ions (note 0004). Kolics further describes that metal alloys with aluminum can be electrolessly plated (note 0025).
Shimizu describes how electroless plating (of what is called a seed layer) can be provided on a component having a portion with structures with sidewalls extending over a base portion (note 0112-0123), where the structures have an upper surface and at least one side surface extending from the corresponding upper surface to a base portion (note figure 11A, with VH2 showing sidewalls extending from a top surface 12 to a bottom potion with 54). Catalyst material 62 (Pd) is deposited on the structure, including the top surface, the sidewalls and the base portion (note figure 11B, 0114-0115), and the catalyst layer is selectively removed from the upper surfaces and base portion, while retaining the catalyst (and thus also its activity) on the side surfaces of the structures (note figure 12A, 0116-0117). Then a metallic (copper) layer 64 is deposited on the side surfaces of the structures, generated by electroless metal growth where the catalyst is present (note figure 12B, 0120-0121, understood to be due to a reaction between the catalyst layer and regents, note the reducing agent providing plating specifically on the palladium only).
Sager describes how it is well known that that aluminum can be electrolessly plated using a plating solution with metal ions (aluminum ions from aluminum salt) and reducing agent, where the substrate is immersed in the plating solution, and the resulting plating can be in nm thickness, such as 10-50 nm (note 0033), where it is described using copper particles to be plated as the substrate (note 0033, so showing a substrate material indicated by Kolics as already being catalytic to plating, note 0004 of Kolics).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu to specifically provide forming the metallic layer of aluminum, for example, specifically by electroless plating, where first there is depositing a catalyst material on each of the plurality of structures and the base portion to form a catalyst layer thereon, selectively removing the catalyst layer from the upper surface of each of the plurality of structures and base portion while retaining an activity of the catalyst layer on the at least one side surface of each of the plurality of structures and the forming the metallic layer on the at least one side surface of each of the plurality of structures by electroless metal growth due to a reaction between the catalyst layer and one or more reagents as suggested by Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to provide a desirably uniform and even metallic layer, since ‘110 indicates the desire to form a metal layer, such as aluminum on the sidewalls, and describes using vapor based deposition, such as CVD processing, and Kolics teaches how electroless plating of metals such as copper, etc. and including aluminum alloy, can be provided as well as CVD application, and where electroless plating is advantageous for providing a uniform and even coating, and therefore, would be suggested to be usable instead of the vapor process of ‘110, where Sager would further suggest that aluminum can be acceptably electrolessly plated as a metal to be plated in a similar fashion, and Kolics also teaches the common use of catalyst application, such as Pd, before electroless plating, and Shimizu further teaches how electroless plating can be provided specifically over only sidewalls of structures with sidewalls, top surfaces and base portions, where the process would include depositing a catalyst material the structures and the base portion to form a catalyst layer thereon, selectively removing the catalyst layer from the upper surface of the structures and base portion while retaining an activity of the catalyst layer on the at least one side surface of each of the plurality of structures and the forming the metallic layer on the at least one side surface of the structures by electroless metal growth due to a reaction between the catalyst layer and one or more reagents, which would allow for efficient plating without plating areas where the metal plating is not desired.
Claim 2: Additionally, as to there being channels formed between the adjacent structures of the plurality of structures, this would be indicted by ‘110 (note gaps between plated areas in figure 2),
As to the channels being filled with polymeric material, Liu indicates how a base film with substrates and similar structures (note base 214 and structures 212, and non-transmissive regions 210, figure 2, 0014), can be provided, where the base film and structures 212, 214 can be made from polymer (note 0039-0040). Structures 212 are described as transmissive regions and can be considered as filling channels between the non-transmissive regions (note figure 2, 0014).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to provide the channels filled with a polymeric material as suggested by Liu with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘110 provides gaps/channels, and Liu, as discussed above, would indicate that for similar systems, all areas without the non-transmissive coating, can be filled with polymeric material.
Claim 4: ‘110 indicates that the cross-section of the structions can include a trapezoidal shape (note figure 2).
Claim 8: As suggested by Kolics and Shimizu as discussed for claim 1 above, the catalyst can be palladium.
Claim 26: As to the film being a light control film configured to angularly filter incident radiation,
Liu indicates how a base film with substrates and similar structures (note base 214 and structures 212, and non-transmissive regions 210, figure 2, 0014), can be provided, where the base film and structures 212, 214 can be made from polymer (note 0039-0040). Structures 212 are described as transmissive regions and can be considered as filling channels between the non-transmissive regions (note figure 2, 0014). Liu would indicate that a light control film is formed (note 0013-0014), and that there would be angular filtering ambient light (so incident radiation) (note figure 2, 0018, 0059).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to provide the formed film can be used as a light control film to angularly filter incident radiation as suggested by Liu with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘11o wants provides using the system with light (note page 3, translation), and Liu indicates how a similarly structured system can be used for angular filtering of ambient light (so incident radiation).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 above, and further in view of Arao et al (US 2002/0195603) and as evidenced by Ort (US 4372292).
Claim 5: as to treating the layer further comprising darkening the metallic layer via anodization, as discussed for claim 1, ‘110 indicates to treat the metallic layer to reduce reflectance with providing an absorption layer 22. This layer can be made of aluminum oxide (note page 5, translation).
Arao indicates how a film of aluminum can be provided and anodized to leave an underlying aluminum layer (644a) with overlying aluminum oxide layer (644b) (note figure 10b) with thicknesses in the nanometer range, and this is described as forming a light shielding film (note 0096).
Ort evidences that anodizing aluminum darkens it (note column4, lines 50-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to further provide a darkening of the metallic aluminum layer by oxidizing the aluminum by anodization to help reduce reflectivity as desired as suggested by Arao with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘110 provides that over the aluminum metal layer, an aluminum oxide layer can be provided to give reduced reflectance, and Arao indicates how an aluminum oxide layer can be provided over an aluminum layer by anodization. Since the same anodizing of the metal layer is described, it is understood that this would provide darkening the metallic layer as claimed, since Ort evidences that anodizing will darken aluminum.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 above, and further in view of Sandhu et al (US 5139974).
Claim 6: as to treating the layer further comprising providing the absorption layer by microetching, as discussed above, for claims 1, it is desired to provide an absorption layer over the metallic layer, where the metallic layer can be aluminum.
Sandhu notes how optical reflectivity of a metallic film can be controlled by roughening, where the roughening increases the optical absorptivity and decreases the optical reflectivity (note column 2, lines 35-50), where the roughness processing can be considered as providing an absorption layer (the layer at the surface where the roughening provided). The treated metal can be aluminum (note column 3, lines 5-10). Furthermore, the roughening can be considered “micro-etching” as etching is used (note column 2, lines 45-55), and the resulting roughening can be very low with measurements made on the micron scale (note column 4, lines 40-45).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to provide the treating the metallic layer to reduce reflection from a major surface of the metallic layer by providing an absorption layer on the metallic layer using micro-roughening as suggested by Sandhu with an expectation of predictably acceptable results of providing a desirable absorption layer, since ‘110 provides an absorption layer over aluminum, and Sandhu indicates reflectivity of an aluminum metal film can be controlled by micro-roughening, as discussed above, which would give an absorption layer on the metallic layer.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 above, and further in view of Japan 2012-061559 (hereinafter ‘559).
Claim 9: as to the catalyst layer selectively removed by reactive ion etching (RIE), for example, Shimizu describes wet etching to remove undesired catalyst (note 0116).
‘559 describes providing electroless plating to an article with sidewalls and a top surface, where palladium catalyst is applied to the top surface and sidewalls, and then catalyst is removed from the top surface but left of the sidewalls by RIE, where the etching applies ions vertically so etches the top surface, not the sidewalls, and then electroless plating can be applied to the sidewalls, not top surface (note pages 3-4, translation, and figures 1, 2, where it is understood that this process would also remove catalyst from the bottom surface in ‘110 where vertical ions would pass through the channels and impact the base portion as well, and note that ‘110 also notes controlled treatment for ion plating (so ions) and sputtering can be conducted so only selected area treated, note figure 2, page 6, translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to also use RIE to remove the catalyst layer selectively as suggested by ‘559 with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since Shimizu wants such selective removal, and ‘559, as discussed above, would indicate that RIE would also be an etching process able to remove the top surface and base portion catalyst, while leaving the side wall catalyst would be suggested from controlling treatment placement as described for ‘110.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 above, and further in view of Japan 05-155127 (hereinafter ‘127).
Claim 10: as to the providing of a liner on the second surface of the substrate, ‘110 shows no metal layer formation on the second surface (note Figure 2).
‘127 provides plating onto an article where electroless plating not desired in a back side surface (second surface), where a masking material 6 (liner) is attached to the back side surface where plating not desired (note figure 4(a), page 3, translation). Then the plating process is provided, including applying catalyst and then electroless plating a metal layer (where mask 6 still shown after plating) (note figure 4(b), page 3, translation), and ‘127 says the mask may be removed subsequent to the plating step (so removed after the formation of the metallic layer) (page 4, translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to also provide a liner on the second surface where plating not desired and removing the liner from the second surface after formation of the metallic layer as suggested by ‘127 with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘110 indicates metallic layer formation not needed on the second surface, and ‘127, as discussed above, indicates it is conventional to form a masking liner on a back/second surface where electroless plating not needed, and that such a liner can be removed after formation of the metallic layer.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 above, and further as evidenced by Misra et al (US 2014/0361945).
Claim 27: as to the providing that the metallic layer is optically opaque, as discussed for claim 1 above, it is suggested that the metallic layer be aluminum with nm range thickness.
Misra evidences that it is known that aluminum layers of only a few nm thickness are optically opaque (note 037).
Therefore, it would have been understood to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that when providing the process of ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager the metallic layer would be optically opaque or at least from the thicknesses given in ‘110 predictably and acceptably optically opaque as evidenced by Misra, which indicates that that aluminum layers of only a few nm thickness (provided by ‘110) are optically opaque.
Claims 2 and 26 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 26 above, and further in view of Wu et al (US 2010/0072170).
Claim 2: Additionally, as to there being channels formed between the adjacent structures of the plurality of structures, this would be indicted by ‘110 (note gaps between plated areas in figure 2). ‘110 further describes that a wire grid polarizer is being formed (abstract).
As to the channels being filled with polymeric material,
Wu teaches a method of manufacturing an optical film (note 0003, 0004 with optical device forming which can include a polarizer film, note 0060, so an optical film). Wu indicates that the optical device being made would include polarizers, such as wire grid polarizers (note 0003). The process includes providing a base film that includes a substrate defining a first surface and a second surface disposed opposite to the first surface and a plurality of structures extending from a base portion of the first surface, wherein each of the plurality of structures defines an upper surface and at least one side surface extending from the corresponding upper surface to the base portion (note figure 5A with substrate 140 and structures 412, for example, 0075). Wu further teaches the desire to form a metallic layer on the at least one side surface of the plurality of structures (note figures 5B, 5C, metallic layers 111, 0077-0078, 0081, claim 1). Wu further teaches that the gaps 415 can be filled with material (note figure 3, with similar structure to figure 5C, where gaps 515 can be filled with material to create a monolithic grating, noting for example, filing with SiO2, note 0067, and where this can be similar to the structure 512 material, where 512 can also be SiO2, note 0066, and where 412 can also be SiO2 (silica), note 0075), where instead of SiO2 it is generally taught that the material can be of high transmissivity (note 0067).
Liu indicates how a base film with substrates and similar structures (note base 214 and structures 212, and non-transmissive regions 210, figure 2, 0014), can be provided, where the base film and structures 212, 214 can be made from polymer (note 0039-0040). Structures 212 are described as transmissive regions and can be considered as filling channels between the non-transmissive regions (note figure 2, 0014).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to provide the channels filled with a polymeric material as suggested by Wu and Liu with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘110 provides gaps/channels and makes wire grid polarizers, Wu indicates that gaps can be filled when making similar articles, including wire grid polarizers, and Liu, as discussed above, would indicate that for similar systems, all areas without the non-transmissive coating, can be filled with polymeric material.
Claim 26: As to the film being a light control film configured to angularly filter incident radiation, ‘110 further describes that a wire grid polarizer is being formed (abstract).
Wu teaches a method of manufacturing an optical film (note 0003, 0004 with optical device forming which can include a polarizer film, note 0060, so an optical film). Wu indicates that the optical device being made would include polarizers, such as wire grid polarizers and also filters (0003). The process includes providing a base film that includes a substrate defining a first surface and a second surface disposed opposite to the first surface and a plurality of structures extending from a base portion of the first surface, wherein each of the plurality of structures defines an upper surface and at least one side surface extending from the corresponding upper surface to the base portion (note figure 5A with substrate 140 and structures 412, for example, 0075). Wu further teaches the desire to form a metallic layer on the at least one side surface of the plurality of structures (note figures 5B, 5C, metallic layers 111, 0077-0078, 0081, claim 1). Wu further teaches that the gaps 415 can be filled with material (note figure 3, with similar structure to figure 5C, where gaps 515 can be filled with material to create a monolithic grating, noting for example, filing with SiO2, note 0067, and where this can be similar to the structure 512 material, where 512 can also be SiO2, note 0066, and where 412 can also be SiO2 (silica), note 0075), where instead of SiO2 it is generally taught that the material can be of high transmissivity (note 0067).
Liu indicates how a base film with substrates and similar structures (note base 214 and structures 212, and non-transmissive regions 210, figure 2, 0014), can be provided, where the base film and structures 212, 214 can be made from polymer (note 0039-0040). Structures 212 are described as transmissive regions and can be considered as filling channels between the non-transmissive regions (note figure 2, 0014). Liu would indicate that a light control film is formed (note 0013-0014), and that there would be angular filtering ambient light (so incident radiation) (note figure 2, 0018, 0059).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ‘110 in view of Liu, Kolics, Shimizu and Sager to provide the formed film can be used as a light control film to angularly filter incident radiation as suggested by Wu and Liu with an expectation of predictably acceptable results, since ‘11o wants provides using the system with light (note page 3, translation) and describes making wire grid polarizers, Wu teaches that similar structures can be formed for wire grid polarizers and also optical filters, suggesting that the article of ‘110 can also be used as an optical filter and Liu indicates how a similarly structured system can be used for angular filtering of ambient light (so incident radiation).
The rejection of claims 1, 4, 6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al (US 2010/0072170) in view of Kolics et al (US 2009/0288594), Shimizu (US 2014/0083745) and Sandhu et al (US 5139974) is withdrawn noting applicant’s arguments of February 18, 2026 and the new rejections above.
Japan 2009-099700 also notes providing metal layers on sidewalls only of an optical film with structures with top surfaces, base portion and sidewalls (note the abstract, and figures)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 18, 2026 have been fully considered.
Note the adjustment to the rejections with the new primary reference to WO ‘110.
Note the new 35 USC 112(a) rejection above.
As to the 35 USC 103 rejections, the previous rejections have been withdrawn, and a new set of rejections using the primary reference to ‘110 are now made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE A BAREFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-1413. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:00 am -3:30 pm, 2nd F 6:00 am -2:30 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, GORDON BALDWIN can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/KATHERINE A BAREFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights