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 .
The instant application having Application No. 17/993,142 filed on 11/23/2022 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/29/2025, with respect to the Claim Objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 11 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 7, and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 7-10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20050207002 A1), in view of Cheng (US 20110171440 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses an optical film, in at least Figure 8, comprising a plurality of polymeric microlayers (1A "layer", 1B "layer", 7B "layer", see examiner’s markup of Figure 8) numbering at least 10 in total (examiner’s markup of Figure 8 shows that there are greater than 10 layers of 1A "layer", 1B "layer", 7B "layer") and disposed between, and co-extruded with, opposing first (302 "boundary layer") and second polymeric skins (304 "boundary layer", 311 "layer", 1A “layer”, paragraph 0100 states "the polymers of the first optical layers, the second optical layers, and the optional non-optical layers are chosen to have similar rheological properties (e.g., melt viscosities) so that they can be co-extruded without flow disturbances", paragraph 0102 states “coextruding the skin layer with altered properties onto one or both sides of the multilayer optical stack during manufacture”, see examiner’s markup of Figure 8), each of the polymeric microlayers (1A "layer", 1B "layer", 7B "layer") having an average thickness of less than about 400 nanometers (nm)(paragraph 0058 states "the individual layers making up the unit cells have optical thicknesses ranging from about 175 to 300 nm (1/4 the wavelength of the light desired to be reflected), preferably from about 212 to 300 nm, to reflect light in the near infrared portion of the spectrum"), such that at least one of the first (302 "boundary layer") and second polymeric skins (304 "boundary layer", 311 "layer", 1A “layer”) comprises a plurality of polymeric skin layers (the second polymeric skin has three layers 304 "boundary layer", 311 "layer", 1A “layer”), the plurality of polymeric skin layers (304 "boundary layer", 311 "layer", 1A “layer”) comprising a polymeric second skin layer (311 "layer") disposed between polymeric first (1A “layer”) and third skin layers (304 "boundary layer", see examiner’s markup of Figure 8), wherein the polymeric second skin layer (311 "layer") comprises one or more of a greater degree of crystallinity, a greater glass transition temperature, a greater modulus, and a greater in-plane birefringence than each of the polymeric first (1A “layer”) and third skin layers (304 "boundary layer", paragraph 0100 states "Preferably, the glass transition temperature of the second optical layers, skin layers, and optional non-optical layers is below the glass transition temperature of the first optical layers", the first skin layer (1A “layer”) is a first optical layer, the third skin layer (304 "boundary layer") is a skin layer, and the second skin layer (311 "layer") can be considered a second optical layer).
Below is an examiner’s markup of Figure 8 of Liu pointing out a first polymeric skin, a second polymeric skin, and polymeric microlayers.
PNG
media_image1.png
687
712
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Liu does not disclose a plurality of polymeric microlayers co-stretched with opposing first and second polymeric skins, each of the first and second polymeric skins having an average thickness of greater than about 1 micron, and each of the polymeric skin layers having an average thickness of greater than about 0.5 microns.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize first and second polymeric skins and polymeric skin layers such that each of the first and second polymeric skins having an average thickness of greater than about 1 micron, each of the polymeric skin layers having an average thickness of greater than about 0.5 microns, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); In re Boesch 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Cheng teaches a plurality of polymeric microlayers co-stretched with opposing first (12 "skin layer", Figure 3B) and second polymeric skins (10 "plastic substrate", 20 "plastic material", paragraph 0042 states "a plurality of optical film layers are attached onto an upper surface of the plastic substrate 10 … the plurality of optical film layers includes 302 layers of PEN (i.e., the first film layers 110) and PMMA (i.e., the second film layers 111) that are formed through coextrusion ... Then the plurality of optical film layers is biaxially stretched").
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical film of Liu modified by a plurality of polymeric microlayers co-stretched with opposing first and second polymeric skins, as taught by Cheng, in order to create a small difference in the refractive indices between optical layers (abstract states that optical film layers are stretched in order to create a difference in refractive indices of no less than 0.1 between the optical film layers).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses wherein the polymeric first skin layer (1A “layer”) is disposed between the plurality of polymeric microlayers (1A "layer", 1B "layer", 7B "layer") and the polymeric third skin layer (304 "boundary layer", see examiner’s markup of Figure 8). However, Liu does not disclose wherein an average thickness of the polymeric first skin layer is greater than an average thickness of the polymeric third skin layer by at least 1 micron.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize a polymeric first skin layer and a polymeric third skin layer such that an average thickness of the polymeric first skin layer is greater than an average thickness of the polymeric third skin layer by at least 1 micron, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); In re Boesch 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses wherein the polymeric first skin layer (1A “layer”) is disposed between the plurality of polymeric microlayers (1A "layer", 1B "layer", 7B "layer") and the polymeric second skin layer (311 "layer", see examiner’s markup of Figure 8). However, Liu does not disclose wherein an average thickness of the polymeric first skin layer is greater than an average thickness of the polymeric second skin layer by at least 1 micron.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize a polymeric first skin layer and a polymeric second skin layer such that an average thickness of the polymeric first skin layer is greater than an average thickness of the polymeric second skin layer by at least 1 micron, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); In re Boesch 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses wherein the polymeric second skin layer (311 "layer") is disposed between the plurality of polymeric microlayers (1A "layer", 1B "layer", 7B "layer") and the polymeric third skin layer (304 "boundary layer", see examiner’s markup of Figure 8). However, Liu does not disclose wherein an average thickness of the polymeric second skin layer is within about 5 microns of an average thickness of the polymeric third skin layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize a polymeric second skin layer and a polymeric third skin layer such that an average thickness of the polymeric second skin layer is within about 5 microns of an average thickness of the polymeric third skin layer, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); In re Boesch 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses wherein one of the polymeric first (1A “layer”) and third skin layers (304 "boundary layer") is an outermost layer of the optical film (see examiner’s markup of Figure 8 which shows 304 “boundary layer” being the outermost layer of the optical film).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses wherein for non-overlapping first and second wavelength ranges, each of the ranges at least 100 nm wide (paragraph 0057 states "The film has an average reflectivity of at least 50%, preferably at least 70%, over a band at least 100 nm wide in the infrared portion of the spectrum, within the range of about 700 nm to about 2000 nm", paragraph 0004 states "the composite laminate structure should transmit at least about 70% of the light in the wavelength region sensitive to the human eye, typically from about 400 to about 700 nanometers (nm)"), and for each of first and second polarization states, the optical film has an optical reflectance of more than about 40% in one of the first and second wavelength ranges (paragraph 0057 states "The film has an average reflectivity of at least 50%, preferably at least 70%, over a band at least 100 nm wide in the infrared portion of the spectrum, within the range of about 700 nm to about 2000 nm"), and an optical transmittance of more than about 40% in the other one of the first and second wavelength ranges (paragraph 0004 states "the composite laminate structure should transmit at least about 70% of the light in the wavelength region sensitive to the human eye, typically from about 400 to about 700 nanometers (nm)").
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 12 and Liu further discloses wherein one of the first and second wavelength ranges comprises at least one visible wavelength (paragraph 0004 states "the composite laminate structure should transmit at least about 70% of the light in the wavelength region sensitive to the human eye, typically from about 400 to about 700 nanometers (nm)") and the other one of the first and second wavelength ranges comprises at least one infrared wavelength (paragraph 0057 states "The film has an average reflectivity of at least 50%, preferably at least 70%, over a band at least 100 nm wide in the infrared portion of the spectrum, within the range of about 700 nm to about 2000 nm").
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20050207002 A1), in view of Cheng (US 20110171440 A1), and further in view of Ichihara (JP 2015038631 A)(see attached machine translation).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses a polymeric second skin layer (311 "layer"), however Liu does not disclose wherein the polymeric second skin layer is crystalline having a melting point of greater than about 260 degrees Celsius (°C).
Ichihara teaches wherein the polymeric second skin layer (33 “second inner protective film”, Figure 2) is crystalline (first paragraph on page 3 of translation states “it is known to use a crystalline polyolefin-based resin, particularly a polypropylene-based resin as a protective film”) having a melting point of greater than about 260 degrees Celsius (°C) (first paragraph on page 21 of translation states “The polypropylene resin used as the second inner protective film 33 of the present invention has a melt flow rate (MFR) measured at a temperature of 230 ° C”).
Thus, the combination of Liu, Cheng, and Ichihara disclose the claimed invention except for a polymeric second skin layer having a melting point of greater than about 260 degrees Celsius (°C). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a material for the polymeric second skin layer such that the polymeric second skin layer has a melting point of greater than about 260 degrees Celsius (°C), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). In the current instance, the melting point is an art recognized results effective variable in that it determines the temperature at which a material melts or turns into a liquid. Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize the melting point because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process.” Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Ichihara teaches a melting point of 230 °C which is only 11.5% away from the claimed value.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20050207002 A1), in view of Cheng (US 20110171440 A1), in view of Lahary (EP 3753969 A1)(see attached copy), and further in view of Hebrink (KR 20070084310 A)(see attached machine translation).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1, however Liu does not disclose wherein at a substantially zero percent relative humidity, the polymeric second skin layer has a glass transition temperature of greater than about 100 °C, and each of the polymeric first and third skin layers has a glass transition temperature of less than about 100 °C.
Laharty teaches wherein at a substantially zero percent relative humidity, the polymeric second skin layer has a glass transition temperature of greater than about 100 °C (paragraph 0143 states "The amorphous [polyamide] had, at a relative humidity of zero (RH0), a glass transition temperature Tg = 119 ° C").
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical film of Liu modified by wherein at a substantially zero percent relative humidity, the polymeric second skin layer has a glass transition temperature of greater than about 100 °C, as taught by Laharty, in order to allow the polymeric second skin layer to be soft and flexible above 100 °C.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20050207002 A1), in view of Cheng (US 20110171440 A1), and further in view of McGurran (US 20080075936 A1).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1, however Liu does not disclose wherein the polymeric third skin layer is disposed between the polymeric second skin layer and an outermost surface of the optical film, and wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface, is not co-extruded and co-stretched with the polymeric microlayers and the first and second polymeric skins.
McGurran teaches wherein the polymeric third skin layer is disposed between the polymeric second skin layer and an outermost surface of the optical film (paragraph 0041 states “One or more additional layers (films, laminates, and/or coatings) can also be incorporated along with the skin layers”), and wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface, is not co-extruded and co-stretched with the polymeric microlayers and the first and second polymeric skins (paragraph 0041 states “the skin layer or layers can be coated or laminated onto the single or multiple layer core using a suitable pressure sensitive or non-pressure sensitive adhesive. Suitable coatings include, but are not limited to, hardcoats, adhesives, antistatics, adhesion promoting primers, UV stabilizing coatings, etc. One or more additional layers (films, laminates, and/or coatings) can also be incorporated along with the skin layers”, because the additional layers are films, laminates, and/or coatings, they would not be co-extruded and co-stretched with any of the skin layers).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical film of Liu modified by wherein the polymeric third skin layer is disposed between the polymeric second skin layer and an outermost surface of the optical film, and wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface, is not co-extruded and co-stretched with the polymeric microlayers and the first and second polymeric skins, as taught by McGurran, in order to protect and shield the skin layers.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1, however Liu does not disclose wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface, is one or more of an optical adhesive, and an adhesion-promoting primer layer for promoting adhesion to an optical adhesive.
McGurran teaches wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface, is one or more of an optical adhesive (paragraph 0041 states “the skin layer or layers can be coated or laminated onto the single or multiple layer core using a suitable pressure sensitive or non-pressure sensitive adhesive”), and an adhesion-promoting primer layer for promoting adhesion to an optical adhesive (paragraph 0041 states “Suitable coatings include, but are not limited to, hardcoats, adhesives, antistatics, adhesion promoting primers, UV stabilizing coatings, etc”).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical film of Liu modified by wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface, is one or more of an optical adhesive, and an adhesion-promoting primer layer for promoting adhesion to an optical adhesive, as taught by McGurran, in order to coat or laminate the skin layers onto a multiple layer core (paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1, however Liu does not disclose wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface comprises an adhesion-promoting primer layer disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and an optical adhesive, the adhesion- promoting primer layer promoting adhesion to the optical adhesive.
McGurran teaches wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface comprises an adhesion-promoting primer layer disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and an optical adhesive (paragraph 0041 states “the skin layer or layers can be coated or laminated onto the single or multiple layer core using a suitable pressure sensitive or non-pressure sensitive adhesive. Suitable coatings include, but are not limited to, hardcoats, adhesives, antistatics, adhesion promoting primers, UV stabilizing coatings, etc. One or more additional layers (films, laminates, and/or coatings) can also be incorporated along with the skin layers”), the adhesion- promoting primer layer promoting adhesion to the optical adhesive (paragraph 0041).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical film of Liu modified by wherein any layer of the optical film that is disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and the outermost surface comprises an adhesion-promoting primer layer disposed between the polymeric third skin layer and an optical adhesive, the adhesion- promoting primer layer promoting adhesion to the optical adhesive, as taught by McGurran, in order to allow for better adhesion between the skin layer and the multiple layer core.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20050207002 A1), in view of Cheng (US 20110171440 A1), and further in view of Ouderkirk (US 5828488 A).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Liu and Cheng disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Liu further discloses an average optical transmittance of greater than about 60% for an orthogonal in-plane second polarization state (paragraph 0004 states "the composite laminate structure should transmit at least about 70% of the light in the wavelength region sensitive to the human eye, typically from about 400 to about 700 nanometers (nm)"). However, Liu does not disclose being a reflective polarizer, such that for a visible wavelength range extending from about 420 nm to about 680 nm, the plurality of polymeric microlayers has an average optical reflectance of greater than about 60% for an in-plane first polarization state.
Ouderkirk teaches being a reflective polarizer, such that for a visible wavelength range extending from about 420 nm to about 680 nm, the plurality of polymeric microlayers has an average optical reflectance of greater than about 60% for an in-plane first polarization state (column 24, lines 12-15 state "Over 80 percent of the light in one plane of polarization is reflected for wavelengths in a range from approximately 450 to 650 nm").
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical film of Liu modified by being a reflective polarizer, such that for a visible wavelength range extending from about 420 nm to about 680 nm, the plurality of polymeric microlayers has an average optical reflectance of greater than about 60% for an in-plane first polarization state, as taught by Ouderkirk, in order to allow the majority of visible light to be reflected and allow the optical film to act as a polarizer.
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 ALAINA M SWANSON whose telephone number is (703)756-5809. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at 571-270-1284. 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.
/ALAINA MARIE SWANSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872