Response to After-final
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 .
Note
Please note that while the rejection is over WO 2021/127206 to Chen, the provisional case 62/704,267 supports the rejection. Therefore, the filing date of WO 2021/127206 is May 1, 2020, which predates the priority date of the application (July 31, 2020). Therefore, WO 2021/127206 is prior art under 102(a)(2).
Here, the rejection statement has been corrected to show the prior art is the WO document rather than the provisional document, but the rejection body and citations have remained unchanged.
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, 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8-9, 11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021/127206 Chen et al (cited by US 62/704,267 Chen et al, please see Applicant’s submitted copy for citations).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches an interlayer film for laminated glass having a three or more-layer structure (figure 12),
the interlayer film including a first layer 1, a second layer 3, and a third layer 2 (figure 12),
the first layer is arranged on a first surface side of the second layer, and the third layer is arranged on a second surface side opposite to the first surface of the second layer (figure 12),
the interlayer film having one end, and the other end being at an opposite side of the one end (figure 12),
each layer contained in the interlayer film having one end, and the other end being at an opposite side of the one end (figure 12),
the one end of the each layer being located at the one end side of the interlayer film in a direction connecting the one end and the other end of the interlayer film, the other end of the each layer being located at the other end side of the interlayer film in the direction connecting the one end and the other end of the interlayer film (figure 12),
in the interlayer film, a thickness of the other end being larger than a thickness of the one end (figure 12),
the second layer contains a thermoplastic resin, the thermoplastic resin in the second layer contains a polyvinyl acetal resin, a content of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the second layer is 100% by weight based on 100% by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the second layer (paragraph 0073, whole layer).
“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 Section I). Therefore, absent evidence of criticality, the taught range of 500 microns to 1.1 mm reads on the claimed range of 500 microns or more.
Chen does not explicitly teach that in the second layer, a thickness at the other end is smaller than a thickness at the one end. However, Chen does teach that the layers may exhibit different properties based on differing compositions within a single interlayer (paragraphs 0087 and 0094). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to alter the thickness of the third layer to be smaller at the other end than the one end based on a desired property such as impact resistance (paragraph 0087).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches that in the first layer, a thickness at the other end is smaller than a thickness at the one end (figure 12A and paragraph 0048), the first layer contains a thermoplastic resin, the thermoplastic resin in the first layer contains a polyvinyl acetal resin, a content of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the first layer is 100% by weight based on 100% by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the first layer (paragraph 0073, whole layer), and
wherein in the third layer, a thickness at the other end is larger than a thickness at the one end (figure 12A).
Regarding claim 5, Chen teaches that a ratio of an average thickness of the first layer to an average thickness of the interlayer film is smaller than a ratio of an average thickness of the third layer to an average thickness of the interlayer film (figure 12A), and
Regarding claim 8, Chen teaches that
the first layer contains a thermoplastic resin and a plasticizer,
the second layer contains the thermoplastic resin and a plasticizer, and
the third layer contains a thermoplastic resin and a plasticizer (paragraph 0096).
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches that a content of the plasticizer in the second layer per 100 parts by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the second layer is larger than a content of the plasticizer in the first layer per 100 parts by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the first layer (paragraph 0096 teaching that layers may have higher or lower plasticizer contents compared to another layer), and
a content of the plasticizer in the second layer per 100 parts by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the second layer is larger than a content of the plasticizer in the third layer per 100 parts by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the third layer (paragraph 0096 teaching that layers may have higher or lower plasticizer contents compared to another layer).
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches a laminated glass comprising: a first lamination glass member (paragraph 0132); a second lamination glass member (paragraph 0132); and the interlayer film for laminated glass according to claim 1 (figure 12), the interlayer film for laminated glass being arranged between the first lamination glass member and the second lamination glass member (paragraph 0002).
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Chen teaches that the first layer contains a thermoplastic resin, the thermoplastic resin in the first layer contains a polyvinyl acetal resin, a content of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the first layer is 100% by weight based on 100% by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the first layer (paragraph 0073, whole layer), and
the third layer contains a thermoplastic resin, the thermoplastic resin in the third layer contains a polyvinyl acetal resin, a content of the polyvinyl acetal resin in the third layer is 100% by weight based on 100% by weight of the thermoplastic resin in the third layer (paragraph 0073, whole layer).
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches that:
provided that a thickness is measured from the one end toward the other end of the interlayer film,
a thickness of the interlayer film at a predetermined position is defined as T microns, a thickness of the first layer at the same position as the predetermined position is defined as T1 microns and a thickness of the third layer at the same position as the predetermined position is defined as T3 microns:
an absolute value of difference between the maximum value of T1/T (0.85) and the minimum value of T1/T (0.20) is 0.65 (paragraph 0054), and
an absolute value of difference between the maximum value of T3/T (0.45) and the minimum value of T3/T (0.1) is 0.35 (paragraph 0055, where the second layer in the text is the third layer of the invention).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 8, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the Chen provisional application does not qualify as prior art because the publication date was after Applicant’s priority date of July 31, 2020. However, WO 2021/127206 Chen, published on June 24, 2021, includes the provisional application of 62/704,267, which was filed May 1, 2020.
MPEP 2154.01(b) states:
AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(d) provides that a U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application ("U.S. patent document") is prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) with respect to any subject matter described in the patent or published application as of either its actual filing date (AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(d)(1) ), or the filing date of a prior application to which there is a priority or benefit claim (AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(d)(2) ). For prior art determinations under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102, a reference patent document need only meet the "ministerial requirements" of 35 U.S.C. 119 and 120, and the provisional or other earlier application(s) to which the reference patent document claims a right of priority or benefit must "describe[] the subject matter" relied upon in the reference patent document as prior art. Penumbra, Inc. v. RapidPulse, Inc., 2023 USPQ2d 292, IPR2021-01466, Paper 34 (March 10, 2023) (precedential as to section II.E.3). The "ministerial requirements" of 35 U.S.C. 119 and 120 are: (1) containing a priority or benefit claim to the prior-filed application; (2) being filed within the applicable filing period requirement (copending with or within twelve months of the earlier filing, as applicable); and (3) having a common inventor or joint inventor or being by the same applicant. See MPEP § 211 et. seq.
Therefore, while the publication date of the WO is June 24, 2021, the filing date of the document is the filing date of the provisional 62/704,267, which is May 1, 2020. WO 2021/127206 Chen et al, therefore, qualifies as prior art under 102(a)(2).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Megha M Gaitonde whose telephone number is (571)270-3598. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am to 5 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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 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.
/MEGHA M GAITONDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights