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 without traverse of Group I, claims 1-9 and 17-20, in the reply filed on September 8, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on September 8, 2025.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borrelli et al. (US 2017/0355636).
Regarding claim 1, Borelli discloses a glass-based substrate comprising: 40-85 mol % SiO2; 0-30 mol % Al2O3; 0-20 mol % B2O3; 0-30 mol % Li2O+Na2O+K2O+Rb2O; 0-30 mol % MgO+CaO+SrO+BaO; 0-10 mol % Y2O3; and 0-10 mol % La2O3 [0006]. Note that the disclosed ranges overlap the claimed ranges for the individual components as well as for the sum of La2O2 and Y2O3 and the claimed ratio. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Further note that the reference renders obvious at least Applicant’s Example E1, which satisfies the claimed sum and ratio.
Regarding claim 2, given the reference discloses that the glass comprises 0-30 mol % Li2O+Na2O+K2O+Rb2O, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed range of Na2O, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 3, given the reference discloses that the glass comprises 0-10 mol % Y2O3 and 0-10 mol % La2O3, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed sum, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 4, based on the ranges disclosed for La2O2, Y2O3, R2O, RO and Al2O3, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed ratio, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I. Further note that the reference renders obvious at least Applicant’s Example E1, which satisfies the claimed ratio.
Regarding claim 5, given the reference discloses that the glass comprises 0-30 mol % MgO+CaO+SrO+BaO, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed range of MgO, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 6, the reference discloses the glass comprises 0-10 mol % La2O3, which overlaps the claimed range [0006]; see MPEP 2144.05 I regarding overlapping ranges.
Regarding claim 7, the reference discloses the glass comprises 0-10 mol % Y2O3, which overlaps the claimed range [0006]; see MPEP 2144.05 I regarding overlapping ranges.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, while the reference does not specifically disclose the claimed properties, given the reference renders obvious the claimed composition including at least Applicant’s Example E1, the reference is considered to render obvious a glass article with the claimed properties, see above discussion. Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties; see MPEP 2112.01 II.
Regarding claim 17, Borelli discloses a glass-based substrate comprising: 40-85 mol % SiO2; 0-30 mol % Al2O3; 0-20 mol % B2O3; 0-30 mol % Li2O+Na2O+K2O+Rb2O; 0-30 mol % MgO+CaO+SrO+BaO; 0-10 mol % Y2O3; and 0-10 mol % La2O3 [0006]. Note that the disclosed ranges overlap the claimed ranges for the individual components as well as for the sum of La2O2 and Y2O3 and the claimed ratio. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Further note that the reference renders obvious at least Applicant’s Example E1, which satisfies the claimed sum and ratio.
Regarding claim 18, given the reference discloses that the glass comprises 0-30 mol % Li2O+Na2O+K2O+Rb2O, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed range of Na2O, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 19, given the reference discloses that the glass comprises 0-10 mol % Y2O3 and 0-10 mol % La2O3, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed sum, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 20, based on the ranges disclosed for La2O2, Y2O3, R2O, RO and Al2O3, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed ratio, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I. Further note that the reference renders obvious at least Applicant’s Example E1, which satisfies the claimed ratio.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A AUER whose telephone number is (571)270-5669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 4 pm EST.
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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571)272-8519. 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.
/LAURA A AUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights