CTFR 17/992,335 CTFR 87399 DETAILED ACTION 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Any rejections made in a previous Office action and not repeated below are hereby withdrawn. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 2 and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida et al. (US 2014/0154440) in view Mauro et al. (US 2013/0136909) . Regarding claim 1, Iida discloses a colored glass comprising, as represented by mole percentage based on oxides, from 55 to 80% of SiO 2 , from 3 to 16% of Al 2 O 3 , from 0 to 12% of B 2 O 3 , from 5 to 16% of Na 2 O, from 0 to 5% of K 2 O and a coloring component from 0.001 to 10% of MpOq (wherein M is at least one member selected from Co, Cu, V, Cr, Pr, Ce, Bi, Eu, Mn, Er, Ni, Nd, W, Rb, Sn and Ag, and p and q represent the atomic ratio of M and O) [0007-0012]. Note that the ranges disclosed for SiO 2 , Al 2 O 3 , B 2 O 3 , Na 2 O and SnO 2 overlap the claimed range; see MPEP 2144.05 I. The reference fails to disclose the claimed amount of Li 2 O. Additionally, while the reference discloses a silver-containing compound as a coloring component in the amount from 0.0001 to 10 mol %, the reference fails to disclose coloring component as silver metal. Mauro discloses a colored glass for consumer electronic comprising one or more metal dopants, including Ag, formulated to impart a preselected color, see abstract and [0005 & 0017]. Additionally, the reference discloses the glass contains Li 2 O from 0 mol % to 20 mol %, see claim 3; see also MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the coloring component of Iida to comprise silver metal as a known colorant used for imparting color to glass for consumer electronics. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the glass of Iida to include from 0 to 20 mol % Li 2 O as a known metal oxide used in glass articles for consumer electronics; see Iida [0001]. Note that based on the values disclosed for Al 2 O 3 , Na 2 O, K 2 O and Li 2 O, the references render obvious the claimed range for R 2 O – Al 2 O 3 . For example, when Al 2 O 3 is 10%, Li 2 O is 7%, Na 2 O is 5% and K 2 O is 1%, then R 2 O – Al 2 O 3 is 3%, which is within the claimed range. Regarding claim 2, Iida discloses the claimed is free of halides, see entire document. Regarding claim 4, the reference discloses from 0 to 5 mol % K 2 O, which overlaps the claimed range [0012]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Regarding claim 5, the reference discloses from 0 to 3 mol % CeO 2 , which overlaps the claimed range [0019]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Regarding claim 6, the reference discloses from 0 to 3 mol % Nd 2 O 3 , which overlaps the claimed range [0021]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Regarding claim 7, the reference discloses from 0 to 3 mol % ErO 2 , which overlaps the claimed range [0021]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Regarding claim 8, the reference discloses the glass as non-polarized, see entire document. Regarding claim 9, while the references do not specifically disclose the glass as comprising two distinct peaks, it is expected the disclosed glass renders obvious a glass with two distinct peaks given the disclosed glass renders obvious the claimed glass composition; see above discussion and MPEP 2112 II “if the composition is physically the same, it must have the same properties.” Regarding claim 10, Iida discloses the glass has a thickness of at least 0.5 mm, which overlaps the claimed range [0026]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. While Iida in view of Mauro does not specifically disclose the claimed transmittance, it is expected the disclosed glass renders obvious a glass with the claimed transmittance given the disclosed glass renders obvious the claimed glass composition; see MPEP 2112 II “if the composition is physically the same, it must have the same properties.” Regarding claim 11, Iida discloses a colored glass comprising, as represented by mole percentage based on oxides, from 55 to 80% of SiO 2 , from 3 to 16% of Al 2 O 3 , from 0 to 12% of B 2 O 3 , from 5 to 16% of Na 2 O, from 0 to 5% of K 2 O and a coloring component from 0.001 to 10% of MpOq (wherein M is at least one member selected from Co, Cu, V, Cr, Pr, Ce, Bi, Eu, Mn, Er, Ni, Nd, W, Rb, Sn and Ag, and p and q represent the atomic ratio of M and O) [0007-0012]. Note that the ranges disclosed for SiO 2 , Al 2 O 3 , B 2 O 3 , Na 2 O and SnO 2 overlap the claimed range; see MPEP 2144.05 I. The reference fails to disclose the claimed amount of Li 2 O. Additionally, while the reference discloses a silver-containing compound as a coloring component in the amount from 0.0001 to 10 mol %, the reference fails to disclose coloring component as silver metal. Mauro discloses a colored glass for consumer electronic comprising one or more metal dopants, including Ag, formulated to impart a preselected color, see abstract and [0005 & 0017]. Additionally, the reference discloses the glass contains Li 2 O from 0 mol % to 20 mol %, see claim 3; see also MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the coloring component of Iida to comprise silver metal as a known colorant used for imparting color to glass for consumer electronics. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the glass of Iida to include from 0 to 20 mol % Li 2 O as a known metal oxide used in glass articles for consumer electronics; see Iida [0001]. Note that based on the values disclosed for Al 2 O 3 , Na 2 O, K 2 O and Li 2 O, the references render obvious the claimed range for R 2 O – Al 2 O 3 . For example, when Al 2 O 3 is 10%, Li 2 O is 7%, Na 2 O is 5% and K 2 O is 1%, then R 2 O – Al 2 O 3 is 3%, which is within the claimed range. Regarding claims 12-16, while the references do not specifically disclose the glass as having the claimed color coordinates, it is expected the disclosed glass renders obvious a glass with claimed color coordinates given the disclosed glass renders obvious the claimed glass composition; see above discussion and MPEP 2112 II “if the composition is physically the same, it must have the same properties.” Regarding claim 17, Iida discloses a colored glass comprising, as represented by mole percentage based on oxides, from 55 to 80% of SiO 2 , from 3 to 16% of Al 2 O 3 , from 0 to 12% of B 2 O 3 , from 5 to 16% of Na 2 O, from 0 to 5% of K 2 O and a coloring component from 0.001 to 10% of MpOq (wherein M is at least one member selected from Co, Cu, V, Cr, Pr, Ce, Bi, Eu, Mn, Er, Ni, Nd, W, Rb, Sn and Ag, and p and q represent the atomic ratio of M and O) [0007-0012]. Note that the ranges disclosed for SiO 2 , Al 2 O 3 , B 2 O 3 , Na 2 O and SnO 2 overlap the claimed range; see MPEP 2144.05 I. The reference fails to disclose the claimed amount of Li 2 O. Additionally, while the reference discloses a silver-containing compound as a coloring component in the amount from 0.0001 to 10 mol %, the reference fails to disclose coloring component as silver metal. Mauro discloses a colored glass for consumer electronic comprising one or more metal dopants, including Ag, formulated to impart a preselected color, see abstract and [0005 & 0017]. Additionally, the reference discloses the glass contains Li 2 O from 0 mol % to 20 mol %, see claim 3; see also MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the coloring component of Iida to comprise silver metal as a known colorant used for imparting color to glass for consumer electronics. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the glass of Iida to include from 0 to 20 mol % Li 2 O as a known metal oxide used in glass articles for consumer electronics; see Iida [0001]. Note that based on the values disclosed for Al 2 O 3 , Na 2 O, K 2 O and Li 2 O, the references render obvious the claimed range for R 2 O – Al 2 O 3 . For example, when Al 2 O 3 is 10%, Li 2 O is 7%, Na 2 O is 5% and K 2 O is 1%, then R 2 O – Al 2 O 3 is 3%, which is within the claimed range. Regarding claim 18, Iida discloses from 0 to 3 mol % CeO 2 , which overlaps the claimed range [0019]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Regarding claim 19, the reference discloses from 0 to 3 mol % Nd 2 O 3 , which overlaps the claimed range [0021]; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Regarding claim 20, the reference discloses from 0 to 3 mol % ErO 2 , which overlaps the claimed range [0021]; see MPEP 2144.05 I . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida et al. (US 2014/0154440) in view Mauro et al. (US 2013/0136909) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Borelli et al. (US 4,479,819) . Iida in view of Mauro renders obvious the colored glass of claim 1. While the references disclose the glass as containing silver, the references fail to disclose the claimed aspect ratio. Borelli discloses a glass body containing silver particles with an aspect ratio of greater than 2:1 to ensure the placement of the long wavelength peak at least near the edge of the infrared portion of the radiation spectrum while avoiding serious breaking problems during an elongation process; see col. 7 lines 11-25. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the Ag of Mauro to have the aspect ratio of Borelli to allow for polarization while preventing serious breakage during an elongation process; see Borelli col. 3 lines 7-19. Claim 3 defines the product by how the product was made, comprising randomly oriented silver particles. Thus claim 3 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited steps imply a structure with silver particles. The references suggest such a product . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed February 19, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Iida in view of Mauro fails to provide motivation for combining the references. Specifically, Applicant notes that merely be a known feature is not sufficient to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art modify Iida with Mauro. Further, Applicant argues that Iida teaches away from a colored glass article including Li 2 O as claimed as making chemical strengthening difficult and as not being included in any of the “Solution to the Problem” compositions. As such, Applicant concludes that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to modify Iida with Mauro. Examiner respectfully disagrees . 07-37-04 AIA In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine , 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones , 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. , 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Applicant is correct that Iida teaches a chemically strengthened glass containing a coloring agent is relatively low as compared to one without a coloring agent [0008]. Iida further discloses that the content in glass having a small ion radius to be exchanged with a large radius alkali metal ions is reduced by the coloring agent contained. Examiner notes, however, the Mauro discloses provided the coloring agent as a dopant during the ion exchange [0017-0018]. Mauro further discloses the ion exchangeable colored glass has a compressive stress greater than 850 MPa and with a depth of greater than about 30 microns [0067]. Additionally, Mauro discloses that the glass includes at least one alkali metal oxide of the form R 2 O wherein R includes one or more of Li, Na, K and Rb [0051]. Given Mauro discloses the ion exchangeable glass can include Li 2 O and be colored using a Ag dopant and given Mauro discloses compressive stress and depth of layer values similar or higher than that of Iida, Examiner maintains that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to include Li 2 O as an alkali metal oxide for ion exchange and Ag as a colorant as known colored glass composition used for consumer electronics. Further, in response to Applicant’s argument that the prior art teaches away from Li 2 O, Examiner notes that “[a] known or obvious composition does not become patentable simply because it has been described as somewhat inferior to some other product for the same use”; see MPEP 2145 X.D.1 . For the above reasons, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Iida in view of Mauro are respectfully maintained. Conclusion 07-39 AIA 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 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 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 2 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 3 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 4 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 5 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 6 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 7 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 8 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 9 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 10 Art Unit: 1783 Application/Control Number: 17/992,335 Page 11 Art Unit: 1783
Prosecution Insights