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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/14/2025 has been entered.
Status of Application
Applicant’s amendments filed on 08/14/2025 have been entered.
Claims 1-3, and 5-20 are pending.
Claim 14 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 1-3, 5-6, and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida (WO 2018/181418 A1) [referenced and translated via US 2020/0016871 A1] in view of Iwamoto et al (US 2017/0072665 A1)
Regarding Claim 1-2, Ishida teaches an interlayer film for laminated glass (Abstract) comprising an oxidation inhibitor (Paragraph 0191), where the interlayer has one end and the other end being at an opposite side of the one end and having a larger thickness than one end. (Figs. 1-6). Ishida teaches the interlayer film has an increment no constant in thickness from the one end to the other end. (Fig. 3-4). Ishida teaches oxidation inhibitor can be IRGANOX 1010 (Paragraph 0196), which has a molecular weight of 1178 g/mol. (See IRGANOX 1010 Technical Data Sheet). This overlaps the claimed 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). Ishida teaches the amount of oxidation inhibitor by weight of a layer, which includes the interlayer, containing the oxidation inhibitor is 0.1 to 2 wt%. (Paragraph 0197).
Ishida does not specifically teach the interlayer film includes a light stabilizer, such as the hindered amine light stabilizer of the claimed composition.
Iwamoto teaches an interlayer film for laminated glass that includes both an oxidation inhibitor and a light stabilizer. (Abstract; Paragraph 0013). Iwamoto teaches the light stabilizer can be a hindered amine light stabilizer (HALS), where a carbon atom of the alkoxy group bonded to the nitrogen atom of a piperidine structure. (Paragraph 0083-0085). Iwamoto teaches the amount of light stabilizer per 100% by weight of weight of a layer, which includes the interlayer, that contains the light stabilizer is 0.01 to 0.05 by weight. (Paragraph 0087). Iwamoto teaches an inclusion of a light stabilizer reduces gap generation, which improves the adhesive force between the interlayer, and undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0009-0012, 0026). Iwamoto teaches a suitable light stabilizer is TINUVIN 765 (Paragraph 0084), which is two molecular HALS additive which has a molecular weight of 508 g/mol and 370 g/mol respectively. (See TINUVIN 765 Technical Data Sheet). This overlaps the claimed 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). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to add a light stabilizer to the interlayer of Ishida to further prevent gap generation and undesirable yellowing as taught by Iwamoto.
Regarding Claim 3, Ishida teaches the oxidation inhibitor is a phenolic oxidation inhibitor. (Paragraph 0192).
Regarding Claim 5, Iwamoto teaches the amount of light stabilizer per 100% by weight of weight of a layer that contains the light stabilizer is 0.01 to 0.05 by weight. (Paragraph 0087). Iwamoto teaches this ensures the gap generation suppression and reduces undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0087). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the weight percent of the light stabilizer to the claimed range as taught by Iwamoto.
Regarding Claim 6, Ishida teaches the amount of oxidation inhibitor by weight of a layer containing the oxidation inhibitor is 0.1 to 2 wt%. (Paragraph 0197).
Regarding Claim 8, Ishida teaches the interlayer has a portion where a wedge angle differs from the one side to the other end side to the other end side in a region having a wedge sectional shape in a thickness direction. (Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 9, Ishida teaches the interlayer comprises a first layer and second layer arranged on a first surface side of the first layer. (Paragraph 0014).
Regarding Claim 10, Ishida teaches Ishida teaches first and second layers both comprise a polyvinyl acetal resin and a plasticizer. (Paragraph 0016).
Regarding Claim 11, Ishida teaches the content of the hydroxyl group of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the first layer is lower than the content of the hydroxyl group of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the second layer. (Paragraph 0015).
Regarding Claim 12, Ishida teaches the content of the plasticizer in the first layer relative to 100 parts by weight of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the first layer is larger than the content of the plasticizer in the second layer relative to 100 parts by weight of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the second layer. (Paragraph 0016).
Regarding Claim 13, Iwamoto also teaches the interlayer with a first and second layer (Paragraph 0082, 0090) and the first layer can comprise both the light stabilizer and oxidation inhibitor. Iwamoto teaches the inclusion of both reduces gap generation, which improves the adhesive force between the interlayer, and undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0009-0012, 0026).
Regarding Claim 15, Ishida teaches the amount of oxidation inhibitor by weight of a layer, including the layer, containing the oxidation inhibitor is 0.1 to 2 wt%. (Paragraph 0197).
Iwamoto teaches the amount of light stabilizer per 100% by weight of weight of a layer that contains the light stabilizer is 0.01 to 0.05 by weight. (Paragraph 0087). Iwamoto teaches this ensures the gap generation suppression and reduces undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0087). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the weight percent of the light stabilizer to the claimed range as taught by Iwamoto.
Regarding Claim 16, Ishida teaches the amount of oxidation inhibitor by weight of a layer, including the interlayer, containing the oxidation inhibitor is 0.1 to 2 wt%. (Paragraph 0197). Ishida teaches the oxidation inhibitor can be IRGANOX 1010, which has the claimed composition. (Paragraph 0196)
Iwamoto teaches the amount of light stabilizer per 100% by weight of weight of a layer, including the interlayer, that contains the light stabilizer is 0.01 to 0.05 by weight. (Paragraph 0087). Iwamoto teaches this ensures the gap generation suppression and reduces undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0087). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the weight percent of the light stabilizer to the claimed range as taught by Iwamoto. Iwamoto teaches the light stabilizer can be TINUVIN 765, which has the claimed composition. (Paragraph 0084).
Regarding Claim 17, Ishida teaches the amount of oxidation inhibitor by weight of a layer, including the interlayer, containing the oxidation inhibitor is 0.1 to 2 wt%. (Paragraph 0197). Ishida teaches the oxidation inhibitor can be IRGANOX 1010, which has the claimed composition. (Paragraph 0196)
Iwamoto teaches the amount of light stabilizer per 100% by weight of weight of a layer, including the interlayer, that contains the light stabilizer is 0.01 to 0.05 by weight. (Paragraph 0087). Iwamoto teaches this ensures the gap generation suppression and reduces undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0087). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the weight percent of the light stabilizer to the claimed range as taught by Iwamoto. Iwamoto teaches the light stabilizer can be TINUVIN 765, which has the claimed composition. (Paragraph 0084).
Regarding Claim 18, Ishida teaches the interlayer contains a polyvinyl acetal resin. (Paragraph 0116).
Regarding Claim 19, Ishida teaches the interlayer film contains a polyvinyl acetal resin. (Paragraph 0118). Ishida teaches the thermoplastic resin in the interlayer can be entirely polyvinyl acetal resin. (Paragraph 0118)
Regarding Claim 20, Ishida teaches the interlayer contains a polyvinyl acetal resin. (Paragraph 0116). Ishida teaches the thermoplastic resin in the interlayer can be entirely polyvinyl acetal resin. (Paragraph 0118)
Ishida teaches the amount of oxidation inhibitor by weight of a layer, including the interlayer, containing the oxidation inhibitor is 0.1 to 2 wt%. (Paragraph 0197). Ishida teaches the oxidation inhibitor can be IRGANOX 1010, which has the claimed composition. (Paragraph 0196)
Iwamoto teaches the amount of light stabilizer per 100% by weight of weight of a layer, including the interlayer, that contains the light stabilizer is 0.01 to 0.05 by weight. (Paragraph 0087). Iwamoto teaches this ensures the gap generation suppression and reduces undesirable yellowing. (Paragraph 0087). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the weight percent of the light stabilizer to the claimed range as taught by Iwamoto. Iwamoto teaches the light stabilizer can be TINUVIN 765, which has the claimed composition. (Paragraph 0084).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida and Iwamoto, in further view of Yoshida et al. (WO 2018/225795 A1) [referenced and translated via US 2020/0156353 A1].
Regarding Claim 7, Ishida and Iwamoto do not specifically teach the interlayer film has a distribution in a content on a weight basis of the light stabilizer in a direction connecting the one end and the other end such that the content on a weight basis of the light stabilizer is larger on the other end side of the direction connecting the one end and the other end, and the interlayer film has a distribution in a content on a weight basis of the oxidation inhibitor in the direction connecting the one end and the other end such that the content on a weight basis of the oxidation inhibitor is larger on the other end side of the direction connecting the one end and the other end.
Yoshida teaches an interlayer for windshield (Paragraph 0001-0002), where the interlayers comprises a light stabilizer or oxidation inhibitor and having such a distribution in content of the light stabilizer in the widthwise direction that the content of the light stabilizer is larger in one end side of the widthwise direction and having such a distribution in content of the oxidation inhibitor in the widthwise direction that the content of the oxidation inhibitor is larger in one end side of the widthwise direction. (Claim 1 of Yoshida; Paragraph 0066-0086). Yoshida teaches this concentration gradient for the light stabilizer and oxidation inhibitor prevents void formation in the interlayer film and maintain the appearance of the laminated glass. (Paragraph 0071). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to set the content distribution of the light stabilizer and oxidation inhibitor in Ishida and Iwamoto to the claimed range to prevent void formation and maintain good appearance when used in laminated glass as taught by Yoshida.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered.
Applicant argues unexpected results from using an oxidation inhibitor having a molecular weight of 250 or greater. Applicant points to Examples 1, 3 and 5 having an improved result from the Foaming Test. This argument is found unpersuasive. For a showing of unexpected results, the data provided must be commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. (MPEP §716.02(d)). Here, the data only has on specific arrangement for the resin, oxidation inhibitor and light stabilizer in very specific amounts. Therefore, there is no support for the claimed range for the amount of each for a showing of unexpected results.
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