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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/26/2025 has been entered.
Status of Application
Applicant’s amendments filed on 12/26/2025 have been entered.
Claims 1-8 are pending.
Claim 8 has been withdrawn.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Victor et al. (US 2011/0287203 A1) in view of Miyazaki (JP 2016-093960 A), Mao et al. (NPL), Gupta et al. (US 2010/0143744 A1), Kobrin (US 2011/0210480 A1), and Yuasa (JP 6268843 B2)
Regarding Claim 1, Victor teaches a molded object (Paragraph 0082) comprising a marked surface, secondary surface structure, provided on a portion of a surface of the molded body (Fig. 1 (6)), the marked surface including a plurality of recesses and projections that are arranged alternately at a predetermined pitch in a predetermined direction in a planar form. (Claim 1 of Victor; Fig. 1 (6), Paragraph 0059). Victor teaches the marked surface is a hydrophobic/water-repellent surface having a water contact angle of greater than or equal to 130 degrees. (Paragraph 0059). This overlaps the claimed range of at least 120 degrees. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05). Victor teaches the surface structures can be formed in a defined shape and uniform size (Paragraph 0097)
Victor does not specifically teach the plurality of recesses are arranged in a matrix in a plan view and the plurality of projections are in a continuous lattice shape as a whole.
Miyazakai teaches a water repellent-member comprising a marked surface with a plurality of recesses and a plurality of projections, where marked surface provides the water-repellency (Fig. 1-3; Paragraph 0018). Miyazaki teaches the plurality of recesses are arranged in a matrix in a plan view and the plurality of projections are in a continuous lattice shape as a whole. (Fig. 1-3; Paragraph 0027, 0030). Miyazaki teaches the plurality of recesses are arranged in a matrix in a plan view and the plurality of projections are in a continuous lattice shape as a whole provides the advantage of improved water repellency and ensures the durability of the water repellent structure. (Paragraph 0022, 0030).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have the plurality of recesses are arranged in a matrix in a plan view and the plurality of projections are in a continuous lattice shape as a whole in Victor as taught by Miyazaki for improved water repellency and durability.
Victor and Miyazaki does not specifically teach the marked surface has a light absorption rate higher than a non-marked surface. Victor teaches forming the marked structure through an embossing technique. (Abstract).
Mao teaches laser surface texturing has an advantage over other methods, such as embossing, as laser surface texturing is fast, high efficiency, good controllability, environmentally friendly nature, and the capability of fabricating surface texture with high complexity and accuracy. (Page 153). Gupta teaches laser texturing a polymeric substrate to make the surface hydrophobic and the laser surface texturing will also inherently increase the light absorption rate, a desired property, of the textured area and offers the advantage of being a one-step process (Abstract; Paragraph 0005, 0029, 0117, 0137).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to form the marked surface using laser surface texturing as taught by Mao and Gupta to have a faster and more efficient way of making the molded textured product of Victor. Furthermore, Gupta teaches this laser texturing will inherently cause higher light absorption in the marked areas of Victor, which is a desired property.
Victor, Miyazaki, Mao and Gupta do not specifically teach marked surface includes a dense portion and sparse portion to form a label indicating various information.
Kobrin teaches forming nanostructure pattern on the surface of a substrate, where the nanostructure pattern has a marked surface includes: a dense portion in which a part of the plurality of recesses and a part of the plurality of projections are dense; and a sparse portion in which another part of the plurality of recesses and another part of the plurality of projections are sparse compared to the dense portion, to form a label indicating various information. (Fig. 5; Abstract; Paragraph 0022-0026) Kobrin teaches this marking pattern with different spacing allows for identification of material and anti-counterfeiting measures. (Paragraph 0007). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have the claimed pattern arrangement for the spacing in Victor to ensure the object can be properly identified and show it is not counterfeited.
Victor, Miyazaki, Mao, Gupta, and Kobrin do not specifically teach the predetermined pitch causes structural color to appear.
Victor teaches the spacing between the protrusions and the width of the protrusions ranges from 1 to 1000 microns. (Paragraph 0059). This creates a range that overlaps the claimed pitch range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05).
Yuasa teaches forming patterns with a laser onto a substrate to form structural colors where the pitch can range from 0.5 to 2 microns, which lies within the spacing range of Victor (Paragraph 0048). Yuasa teaches using these patterns to form structural color is better for the environment than using pigment, due to the recyclability and environmental friendliness. (Paragraph 0002). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to ensure the pitches of Victor have the claimed range and provide structural color to provide decorative elements for environmental friendliness.
Regarding Claim 2, Victor teaches the dimensions of the projection and the spacing of each recess can be 1 nm to 100 nm. (Claim 1 of Victor). This allows the depth of each of recess and a width of each process satisfy the depth/width relationship of less than or equal to 1. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding Claim 3, Victor teaches the molded body has a groove (Fig. 1 (6)), a primary surface feature, that has a spacing and dimension of 1 to 1000 microns. (Claim 1 of Victor). This means the groove’s width is greater than the predetermined pitch and the marked surface is provided on an inside of the groove. (Fig. 1 (6)).
Regarding Claim 4, Victor teaches the molded body is made of resin (Paragraph 0109)
Regarding Claim 5, Victor teaches the molded body can comprise epoxy, a thermosetting resin. (Paragraph 0109, 0111).
Regarding Claim 6, Victor teaches the molded body can comprise a filler. (Paragraph 0110).
Regarding Claim 7, Gupta teaches the marked surface can be formed by laser processing. (Abstract; Paragraph 0029, 0117).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered.
A new grounds of rejection has been made in view of Applicant’s amendments.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 9:30am-3:30pm, 8:30PM-10:30PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached on (571) 270-1547. 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.
/Michael Zhang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781