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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group 1 and species 1 (Fig. 1) corresponding to claims 1-6, 9 and 11 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-20, 21, 25-26 and 33 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/11/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/24/2025, 04/07/2023, and 10/07/2022. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6, the term “the heatable layer” should read as “the at least one heatable layer”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over Bouchiat (US 20170318625 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Bouchiat discloses, a glazing (see transparent heating device 200 with transparent element 201 in Fig. 2A and in Fig. 7and disclosed in para 0052 “the transparent device 200 could be a vehicle windscreen or wing mirror”), comprising:
a first glass substrate (see transparent substrate 203 in Fig. 7 and disclosed in para 0049 “a transparent substrates 203, which is for example formed of sapphire, quartz, glass, laminated glass […]”), and
a heatable coating (see graphene film 202 in Fig. 7 and disclosed in para 0061 “During operation of the transparent heating device 200, the graphene film 202 is for example made to generate heat by passing a current through it”) formed on the first glass substrate (203, and see Fig. 7), the heatable coating (202) including at least one heatable layer (see at least one heatable layer annotated in Fig. 7) and including at least one partial deletion (see at least one partial deletion annotated in Fig. 7) wherein the heatable coating (202) has a thickness thinner at the partial deletion than in a non-deleted portion of the heatable coating (see annotated Fig. 7),
wherein the partial deletion (see at least one partial deletion annotated in Fig. 7) of the heatable layer (see at least one heatable layer annotated in Fig. 7) is formed in a differential heating area of the heatable coating (see Fig. 7 and disclosed in para 0083 “the difference in resistivity between regions of the graphene film 202 results from a difference in the number of mono-layers of graphene in each of the regions”).
PNG
media_image1.png
250
919
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 1, Bouchiat further discloses, wherein the heatable coating (202) includes first and second heatable layers (see first and second heatable layers annotated Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 3, Bouchiat further discloses, wherein the at least one partial deletion (see at least one partial deletion annotated in Fig. 7) includes a total thickness reduction of one of the first and second heatable layers (see the at least one partial deletion annotated in Fig. 7 includes a total thickness reduction of the first layer).
Regarding claim 6, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 1, Bouchiat further discloses, wherein the heatable layer contains silver (disclosed in para 0060 “the resistance can be reduced further by providing a coating of silver on the graphene film”).
Regarding claim 9, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 1, Bouchiat further discloses, further comprising a second glass substrate (see layer 204 in Fig. 2B) laminated to the first glass substrate (see Fig. 2B and disclosed in para 0050 “the layer 204 is formed contacting the graphene film 202, but in alternative embodiments it could be formed on the transparent substrate 203, and the graphene film 202 could be an outer layer of the mirror, for example coated by a transparent varnish”).
Regarding claim 11, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 1, Bouchiat further discloses, wherein the differential heating area (see Fig. 7 where the at least one partial deletion is annotated) is an area for a wiper to rest upon the glazing (intended use) when installed in a vehicle (disclosed in para 0052 “the transparent device 200 could be a vehicle windscreen” wherein it is inherent that the windscreen is for a wiper to rest upon).
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 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 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouchiat in view of Unger (DE 19702448 A1 and see PDF translation attached).
Regarding claim 2, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 1, Bouchiat further discloses, wherein the heatable coating (202) includes a single heatable layer (see first heatble layer annotated in Fig. 7).
However, Bouchiat does not explicitly disclose, the partial deletion includes a partial thickness reduction of the single heatable layer.
Nonetheless, Unger teaches, the partial deletion (see conductor tracks 3 in Fig. 1) includes a partial thickness reduction (see Fig. 1) of the single heatable layer (see PTC layer 2 in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify the first heatable layer of Bouchiat wherein the partial deletion includes a partial thickness reduction of the first heatable layer as taught/suggested by Unger in order to embed electric terminals/electrodes/components within the heatable layer so as reducing the overall size of the glazing/transparent heating device.
Regarding claim 5, Bouchiat discloses, the glazing according to claim 3.
However, Bouchiat does not explicitly disclose, wherein the partial deletion includes a partial thickness reduction of one of the first and second heatable layers.
Nonetheless, Unger teaches, the partial deletion (see conductor tracks 3 in Fig. 1) includes a partial thickness reduction (see Fig. 1) of a heatable layer (see PTC layer 2 in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filling date (post AIA ) to modify one of the first and second heatable layer of Bouchiat wherein the partial deletion includes a partial thickness reduction of one of the first and second heatable layer as taught/suggested by Unger in order to embed electric terminals/electrodes/components within the heatable layer so as reducing the overall size of the glazing/transparent heating device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 6:00 am-3:30 pm ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761