DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 4th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed November 4th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-3 have been amended. Claim 7 has been cancelled. Claim 9 has been added.
The Section 103 rejections over Bowden (as the primary reference) have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 103 rejections over Nomura (as the primary reference) have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 103 rejections over Nishizawa (as the primary reference) have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 103 rejections over Hayashi (as the primary reference) have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 103 rejections over Cai (as the primary reference) have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 4th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Cai in view of Iwao and Hayashi, Applicant argues that the balance of SiO2 B2O3 and BaO are not respected. The Examiner disagrees.
However, note that while both Iwao and Hayashi do not disclose all the features of the present claimed invention, Iwao and Hayashi are used as teaching references, and therefore, it is not necessary for this secondary reference to contain all the features of the presently claimed invention, In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224, 226 (CCPA 1973), In re Keller 624 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). Rather this reference teaches a certain concept, namely, motivation and specificity regarding CuO, TiO2, As2O3, and Sb2O3 in order to provide improvements in UV-transmittance/transparency (CuO, TiO2) and environmental/health concerns (As2O3, Sb2O3), wherein it would be unnecessary for one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings regarding B2O3 and SiO2, in combination with the primary reference, discloses the presently claimed invention. Furthermore, it is noted that “obviousness under 103 is not negated because the motivation to arrive at the claimed invention as disclosed by the prior art does not agree with appellant’s motivation”, In re Dillon, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1990), In re Tomlinson, 150 USPQ 623 (CCPA 1966).
Cai is a more general disclosure regarding the cylindricality of the holes in that both hourglass, such as for hermetically sealable holes and cylindrical/tapered holes are taught and can be optimized for, in part due to the Thiele modulus (balance of reaction and diffusion rates) [0057, 0071, 00132-00135, 00177], and also in part due to composition, such as comprising larger than 5 mol% B2O3, such as 5-10 mol%, and lower Al2O3, such as less than 10 mol%, such as 4-10 mol% due in part due the inefficiency caused by byproducts [00169, 00170, 00178, 00181].
Furthermore, the knowledge that higher content of SiO2 providing increased cylindricality in (laser modified and etched) through holes is well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Dalhberg et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0342451 A1) teach that highly silicate glasses must be specially processed in order to provide a waist for hermetic sealing [0003-0006].
Furthermore, Guo et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/03454262 A1) teach that glass compositions higher than 75 mol% provide a desirable effect of widening the waists of glass to reduce dissipation of electromagnetic energy as heat and provide a low loss angle/tangent as an interposer [0002-0006] due to the increased amount of SiO2 resulting in a decrease in byproducts and accumulation of insoluble solids (residue) that narrows the waist (decreasing cylindricality) [0069].
However, one would need to balance this with the usage and formability of the glass, specifically regarding modulus, coefficient of thermal expansion, devitrificiation, liquidus temperature, strain point, and annealing point, all of which are somewhat accounted for in Cai [00167, 00169, 00172, Table 1], but does not teach any specifics regarding formability in relation to the composition.
However, Ellison et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0047898 A1) teach accounting for liquidus temperatures/viscosities, devitrification, strain point, and annealing point [0007, 0020-0021, 0045-0053] and specifically relates this to compositional requirements, such as a total concentration of alkali elements being less than 0.1 mol% being alkali-free due to it being difficult or economically impossible to entirely eliminate alkali metal oxides as a result of contamination of the raw materials or in refractories [0020], the SiO2 content being greater than 60 mol% and at a maximum of 80 mol% that will allow batch materials to be formed by the draw down process being melted using conventional, high volume techniques [0053-0054], Al2O3 having an overall range of 10 to 15 mol%, such as 11-13 mol%, and B2O3 having an overall range of 3-8 mol%, such as 4-6 mol% [0055, 0058] but really may be varied so long as they are in balance with each other and with the alkaline metal oxides (MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO) [0059], wherein an alkaline oxide content can be optimized to provide a draw down process comprising MgO greater than or equal to 3 mol%, CaO greater than or equal to 4 mol%, and BaO greater than or equal to 1 mol%, with fining performed without the use of substantially amounts of arsenic and antimony (no more than 0.005 mol%) [0072-0074, 0077, 0087].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide an intermediate range between and/or partially overlapping using the teachings of Guo and Ellison, set within the boundaries of Cai’s range, such as 70-80 mol% or 70-75 mol% or 75-80 mol%, or more importantly within the boundaries of the higher silica content examples such as 70-74 mol%, wherein it would have been important to maximize silica content to decrease residue within the holes and provide increased cylindricality/wider waists [Guo] while also providing a glass composition that can be draw down processed using conventional, high volume equipment [Ellison].
Further regarding the B2O3 and Al2O3 content, using the process optimized and balanced ranges of Ellison, it would have been obvious how to further optimize the desired cylindricality-based ranges of the relatively higher boron oxide and relatively lower alumina content in Cai to be substantially within or near the claimed ranges, such as 5-8 mol% for B2O3 and 9-12 moL% for Al2O3. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to achieve the desired etching conditions for cylindricality [Cai] while also providing a balanced melting/liquidus temperature and viscosity, while also maintaining a beneficial annealing point [Ellison, 0058] and a beneficial high liquidus viscosity and annealing point [Ellison, 0055] balanced with each other and the alkaline metal oxides to provide balanced formation and strength properties and to prevent devitrification and gaseous inclusions, respectively [Ellison, 0059].
Claim Objections
It is recommended that dependent claims not contain redundant limitations for clarity purposes. For instance, claims 6 and 9-10 all contain oxides having identical ranges, only the boron oxide range being different. It is recommended that the claim only contain boron oxide and other dependent claims only contain ranges that have narrowed after the first claim to prevent redundancy or even 112, 4th paragraph issues.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-6 & 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bowden et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0122229 A1) (hereinafter “Bowden”) in view of Hackert et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0057390 A1) (hereinafter “Hackert”) OR Burket et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0119150 A1) (hereinafter “Burket”), and optionally in view of Hayashi (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0044223 A1) (hereinafter “Hayashi”) and Iwao et al. (JP 2019-038723 A) (hereinafter “Iwao”) and/or Murata et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/00151426 A1) (hereinafter “Murata”).
Regarding claims 1-4 and 8, Bowden teaches a substantially alkali-free (i.e. a sum of Na2O, K2O, and Li2O is less than or equal to 0.1 mol% [0102]) glass for displays, specifically as thin film transistor backplane, the glass composition comprising 68.1-72.3 mol% SiO2, which may be up to 69.7 to 71.7 mol% [0023, 0085], 11.0-14.0 mol% Al2O3, 0-3 mol% B2O3, 1.0-7.2 mol% or 3.1-5.8 mol% MgO, 4.1-10.0 mol% or 4.5-7.4 mol% CaO, 0-4.2 mol% or 0-2.0 mol% SrO, 1.2-4.4 mol% and/or 2.6-4.4 mol% BaO [0021-0022], wherein TiO2 and phosphates (i.e. P2O5) may or may not be included in an amount up to 2.0 mol% [0101], and possibly fining agents such as SnO2, Sb2O3, and As2O3, wherein in an environmentally friendly fining package in an amount of at most 0.25 mol%, 0.05 mol%, and 0.05 mol%, respectively, wherein while the others are poisonous SnO2 can be included in very small amounts such as 0.001 to 0.5 mol% [0103-109], wherein multiple embodiments anticipate at least claims 1 and 4, wherein several more, specifically samples 294 and 298-299 anticipate claims 1-4, wherein sample 299 comprises 71.45 mol% SiO2, 12.36 mol% Al2O3, 2.6 mol% B2O3, 3.52 mol% MgO, 5.05 mol% CaO, 1.96 mol% SrO, 2.93 mol% BaO, and 0.1 SnO2, wherein it is assumed that Sb2O3 and As2O3 are not included because SnO2 is included, and that TiO2, CuO, and P2O5 are not included (~0 mol%) because they are not listed, wherein “when, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is anticipated if one of them is in the prior art" Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2131.03 I. Furthermore, wherein the ranges do not anticipate the claimed ranges, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05 I.
Bowden does not teach a through hole in the glass substrate.
Hackert teaches a laser cutting technology for cutting display glass composition mainly used for production of thin film transistors [0004], wherein a plurality of laser modified areas form damage tracks that generally take the form of through holes [0091-0092], wherein the glass is cut/broken/separated along these lines to form radiused edges and interior through holes and slots [0004, 0106-0118].
OR
Burket teaches a glass substrate for displays and thin film transistors that is cut or separated [0003, 0102] along a contour by laser modification of damage tracks followed by etching to form defect lines that establish a cutting/separation path defining outer rounded corners and interior apertures and slots for acoustic pathways [0098-0099, 0106-0110, 0146-0147, 0157-0158, 0183, 0185].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide at least one through hole to a glass substrate intended to displays/transistors. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form damage tracks for a faster, cheaper, more reliable method of glass separation [Hackert], specifically to provide acoustic pathways in displays [Burket].
Alternatively, in the event that P2O5, TiO2, and/or CuO are included:
Hayashi teaches an alkali-free etchable glass suitable as a display substrate for a TFT [0001], wherein while including an extremely small amount of TiO2, such as 0.001 mol% or more, may allow for suppressing coloration, it is particularly preferably less than 0.03% as an ultraviolet light transmittance is liable to lower otherwise [0053], wherein Iwao corroborates that teaching and further teaches that CuO inclusion is reduced for this same purpose to less than 0.1 mol%, as it also prevents UV irradiation processing for mounting semiconductors when used as a glass substrate [0024].
AND/OR
Murata teaches an alkali-free etchable glass suitable as a display substrate for a thin film transistor [0002], wherein P2O5 that improves devitrification resistance of the glass but a large content is unfavorable because of phase separation, increased opacity, and remarkable acid resistance deterioration, and should most preferably be limited to 0-1 mol% [0047].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention considering the inclusion of P2O5, TiO2, and CuO at the time invention to limit their inclusion to within the claimed ranges. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to promote ultraviolet light transmission [Hayashi/Iwao] AND/OR prevent phase separation, increased opacity, and remarkable acid resistance deterioration [Murata].
Regarding claim 5, although the prior art does not disclose the etching rate as claimed, the claimed properties are deemed to be inherent to the structure in the prior art since Bowden teaches an invention with a substantially similar structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention. Products of identical structure and composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on the Applicants to prove otherwise. Alternatively, an etch index is recorded after a 10 minute soak in an HF containing liquid and preferably below 21 µm/mm3 [0021-0022, 0112] wherein sample 299 has an etch index of 20.79 giving an estimated etching rate of 2.08 µm/min.
Further regarding claim 6, although the prior art does not disclose the etching rate as claimed, the claimed properties are deemed to be inherent to the structure in the prior art since Bowden teaches an invention with a substantially similar structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention. Products of identical structure and composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on the Applicants to prove otherwise. Alternatively, sample 299 at a high temperature viscosity of 200P is 1691 °C and at 35kP is 1314 °C.
Further regarding claim 8, while the glass substrate is not stated to be “for use in a microLED display”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Claims 1, 4-6, & 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomura et al. (JP 2016-047794 A) (hereinafter “Nomura”) in view of Hackert et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0057390 A1) (hereinafter “Hackert”) OR Burket et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0119150 A1) (hereinafter “Burket”), and optionally in view of Hayashi (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0044223 A1) (hereinafter “Hayashi”) and Iwao et al. (JP 2019-038723 A) (hereinafter “Iwao”) and/or Murata et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/00151426 A1) (hereinafter “Murata”).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Nomura teaches an alkali-free glass (less than 0.1 mol% of Na2O and K2O and the like, presumably Li2O and Cs2O) [0011] for as a substate glass for forming semiconductor elements thereon [0002], the glass composition comprising 67 to 77 mol%, preferably 68.5 to 74 mol%, of SiO2 [0012], 8 to 16 mol%, most preferably 9.5 to 14 mol%, of Al2O3 [0014], 0.1 to 2.9 mol%, most preferably 0.6 to 2.1 mol%, of B2O3 [0015], 2 to 6.5 mol%, most preferably 3 to 5.5 mol%, of MgO [0016], 5.5 to 12.5 mol%, most preferably 7.5 to 9 mol%, of CaO [0017], 0 to 8 mol%, most preferably 0.5 to 6.5 mol%, of SrO [0018], 2 to 6 mol%, most preferably 3 to 4.5 mol%, of BaO [0019], 2% or less, more preferably 0.5% or less, of SnO2 in combination with other unclaimed oxides [0024], and preferably ~0% of Sb2O3, As2O3, and PbO to facilitate recycling and prevent deterioration of thin films provided on the surface of the glass [0025], wherein the ranges do not anticipate the claimed ranges, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05.
Nomura does not teach a through hole in the glass substrate.
Hackert teaches a laser cutting technology for cutting display glass composition mainly used for production of thin film transistors [0004], wherein a plurality of laser modified areas form damage tracks that generally take the form of through holes [0091-0092], wherein the glass is cut/broken/separated along these lines to form radiused edges and interior through holes and slots [0004, 0106-0118].
OR
Burket teaches a glass substrate for displays and thin film transistors that is cut or separated [0003, 0102] along a contour by laser modification of damage tracks followed by etching to form defect lines that establish a cutting/separation path defining outer rounded corners and interior apertures and slots for acoustic pathways [0098-0099, 0106-0110, 0146-0147, 0157-0158, 0183, 0185].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide at least one through hole to a glass substrate intended to displays/transistors. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form damage tracks for a faster, cheaper, more reliable method of glass separation [Hackert], specifically to provide acoustic pathways in displays [Burket].
Further regarding claims 1 and 4, while a range for the inclusion of P2O5, TiO2, and CuO are not taught, it is assumed that it is because they are essentially at an impurity/negligible level or not included (~0 mol%, which is within or close to the range for each claimed oxide). In the event that they are included:
Hayashi teaches an alkali-free etchable glass suitable as a display substrate for a TFT [0001], wherein while including an extremely small amount of TiO2, such as 0.001 mol% or more, may allow for suppressing coloration, it is particularly preferably less than 0.03% as an ultraviolet light transmittance is liable to lower otherwise [0053], wherein Iwao corroborates that teaching and further teaches that CuO inclusion is reduced for this same purpose to less than 0.1 mol%, as it also prevents UV irradiation processing for mounting semiconductors when used as a glass substrate [0024].
AND/OR
Murata teaches an alkali-free etchable glass suitable as a display substrate for a thin film transistor [0002], wherein P2O5 that improves devitrification resistance of the glass but a large content is unfavorable because of phase separation, increased opacity, and remarkable acid resistance deterioration, and should most preferably be limited to 0-1 mol% [0047].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art considering the inclusion of P2O5, TiO2, and CuO at the time invention to limit their inclusion to within the claimed ranges. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to promote ultraviolet light transmission [Hayashi/Iwao] AND/OR prevent phase separation, increased opacity, and remarkable acid resistance deterioration [Murata].
Regarding claim 5, the temperature T2 at 102 poise (dPa·s) is preferably 1780 °C or less and at the temperature T4 104 poise (dPa·s) is preferably 1370 °C or less, wherein assuming the temperature T2.5 at 102.5 poise (dPa·s) is between the T2 and T4 and closer in value to T2, it is assumed it inherently or obviously falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 6, Nomura teaches the etching rate increases are less in demand and that a controlled etching rate is preferred in order to prevent etching spots [0007-0008, 0010] and that in an HF solution, an etching rate is about 0.1 to 0.7 µm/min [0038].
Further regarding claim 8, while the glass substrate is not stated to be “for use in a microLED display”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Claims 1-6 & 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishizawa et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0003884 A1) (hereinafter “Nishizawa”) in view of Hackert et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0057390 A1) (hereinafter “Hackert”) OR Burket et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0119150 A1) (hereinafter “Burket”), and optionally in view of Bowden et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0122229 A1) (hereinafter “Bowden”) AND/OR Hayashi (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0044223 A1) (hereinafter “Hayashi”) and Iwao et al. (JP 2019-038723 A) (hereinafter “Iwao”).
Regarding claims 1-4 and 8, Nishizawa teaches an alkali-free glass usable as a glass substrate in a display, suitable for forming thin film transistors thereon, wherein the glass is capable of reducing compaction, but without the necessity of increasing the strain point, and having a high resistance to acid and buffered hydrofluoric acid, has a small specific gravity/density, and scarcely undergoes devitrification [0003-0005-0013], the glass composition comprising 68 to 80 mol%, particularly preferably at least 70 to at most 72 mol%, of SiO2 [0077, 0086], 0 to 12 mol%, particularly preferably at least 8 to at most 9.5 mol%, of Al2O3 [0078, 0087], more than 0 to less than 7 mol%, most preferably at least 5 to less than 7 mol%, of B2O3 [0079, 0089], 0 to 12 mol%, particularly preferably at least 6 to at most 10 mol%, of MgO [0080, 0093], 0 to 15 mol%, particularly preferably at least 2.5 to at most 6 mol%, of CaO [0081, 0094], 0 to 4 mol%, most preferably at least 2 to at most 4 mol%, of SrO [0082, 0018], 0 to 1 mol%, most preferably at most 0.5 mol%, of BaO [0083, 0098], 0 to 4 mol%, more preferably 0 to 1%, of SnO2 [0107-0108], 0 to 4 mol%, more preferably 0 to 2%, of TiO2 [0112, 0115], and preferably at most 0.1% of Sb2O3, As2O3, and P2O5 to facilitate recycling and for environmental concerns [0116], wherein it is assumed that since CuO is not mentioned it is contained in impurity amounts less than the claimed range or not included (~0 mol%), wherein the ranges do not anticipate the claimed ranges, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05 I. Furthermore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2144.05.
Nishizawa does not teach a through hole in the glass substrate.
Hackert teaches a laser cutting technology for cutting display glass composition mainly used for production of thin film transistors [0004], wherein a plurality of laser modified areas form damage tracks that generally take the form of through holes [0091-0092], wherein the glass is cut/broken/separated along these lines to form radiused edges and interior through holes and slots [0004, 0106-0118].
OR
Burket teaches a glass substrate for displays and thin film transistors that is cut or separated [0003, 0102] along a contour by laser modification of damage tracks followed by etching to form defect lines that establish a cutting/separation path defining outer rounded corners and interior apertures and slots for acoustic pathways [0098-0099, 0106-0110, 0146-0147, 0157-0158, 0183, 0185].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide at least one through hole to a glass substrate intended to displays/transistors. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form damage tracks for a faster, cheaper, more reliable method of glass separation [Hackert], specifically to provide acoustic pathways in displays [Burket].
Nishizawa teaches that the process to form the glass is not limited and includes a float process and or a draw down process [0139] and in the event that the concentration range of BaO is not sufficiently overlapping or close enough that it would have the same effect as the claimed range:
Bowden teaches a substantially alkali-free (i.e. a sum of Na2O, K2O, and Li2O is less than or equal to 0.1 mol% [0102]) glass for displays, specifically as thin film transistor backplane, the glass composition comprising 68.1-72.3 mol% SiO2, which may be up to 69.7 to 71.7 mol% [0023, 0085] and 1.2-4.4 and/or 2.6 to 4.4 BaO [0021-0022], wherein the draw down process requires alkaline earth metals since they play an important role in destabilizing crystalline phases that would otherwise form, wherein SrO and BaO are both included in a balanced amount and BaO content should be greater than or equal to 1 mol% [0100, 0109], wherein a draw down process is preferred due to a lack of necessary polishing unlike the float process [0070, 0072].
Therefore, it would have been obvious one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to include BaO within the claimed range at the edge (~1 mol%) or slightly above the preferred amount in Nishizawa. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to provide a glass composition suitable for a draw down method that does require polishing without stabilizing crystalline phases that might form [Bowden], but also substantially maintains the properties desired by Nishizawa.
However, Nishizawa also teaches that TiO2 can be optionally included in amounts greater than the claimed range for a drawn down method [0119], and does not explicitly teach whether or not CuO is included:
Hayashi teaches an alkali-free etchable glass suitable as a display substrate for a TFT [0001], wherein while including an extremely small amount of TiO2, such as 0.001 mol% or more, may allow for suppressing coloration, it is particularly preferably less than 0.03% as an ultraviolet light transmittance is liable to lower otherwise [0053], wherein Iwao corroborates that teaching and further teaches that CuO inclusion is reduced for this same purpose to less than 0.1 mol%, as it also prevents UV irradiation processing for mounting semiconductors when used as a glass substrate [0024].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art considering the inclusion TiO2 and CuO at the time invention to limit their inclusion to within the claimed ranges. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to promote ultraviolet light transmission [Hayashi/Iwao].
Claims 1, 4-6, & 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0044223 A1) (hereinafter “Hayashi”) in view of Hackert et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0057390 A1) (hereinafter “Hackert”) OR Burket et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0119150 A1) (hereinafter “Burket”), and optionally in view of Iwao et al. (JP 2019-038723 A) (hereinafter “Iwao”).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Hayashi teaches a glass composition for a glass substrate comprising 65-75 mol% SiO2, 11-15 mol% Al2O3 most preferably 12-14 mol%, 0-5 mol% B2O3 most preferably 0.1-2.5 mol%, 0-5 mol% MgO most preferably 1-3 mol%, 0-10 mol% CaO most preferably 6.5-8.5 mol%, 0-5 mol% SrO most preferably 0-3 mol%, 0-6 mol% BaO most preferably 1-4 mol% [0036-0044], wherein Li2O+ Na2O+ K2O is 0.5 mol% or less [0021, 0062, 0092], P2O5 is included in an amount of 0.01 to 7 mol%, preferably 1 to 2.5 mol% [0050] TiO2 comprises a coloration effect wherein too much lowers light transmittance such that it is included most preferably 0.03 mol% or less but that adding a trace amount, such as greater than 0.001 mol%, suppresses coloration [0053], SnO2 has a bubble suppressing effect as small levels and a devitrified foreign matter generating effect at larger levels such that that the concentration most preferably lies within 0.03 to 0.2 mol% [0056] and As2O3 and Sb2O3 are causes for environmental concern and it is desired to use as small amount as possible, such as most preferably less than 0.003 mol% [0055], wherein it is assumed that since CuO is not mentioned it is contained in impurity amounts less than the claimed range or not included (~0 mol%), wherein the ranges do not anticipate the claimed ranges, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05 I.
Hayashi does not teach a through hole in the glass substrate.
Hackert teaches a laser cutting technology for cutting display glass composition mainly used for production of thin film transistors [0004], wherein a plurality of laser modified areas form damage tracks that generally take the form of through holes [0091-0092], wherein the glass is cut/broken/separated along these lines to form radiused edges and interior through holes and slots [0004, 0106-0118].
OR
Burket teaches a glass substrate for displays and thin film transistors that is cut or separated [0003, 0102] along a contour by laser modification of damage tracks followed by etching to form defect lines that establish a cutting/separation path defining outer rounded corners and interior apertures and slots for acoustic pathways [0098-0099, 0106-0110, 0146-0147, 0157-0158, 0183, 0185].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide at least one through hole to a glass substrate intended to displays/transistors. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form damage tracks for a faster, cheaper, more reliable method of glass separation [Hackert], specifically to provide acoustic pathways in displays [Burket].
Claims 1-6 & 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Cai et al. (WO 2022/026348 A1) (hereinafter “Cai”), wherein claims 1-4 are optionally in view of Guo et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0354262 A1) (hereinafter “Guo”) and Ellison et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0047898 A1) (hereinafter “Ellison”) and/or Iwao et al. (JP 2019-038723 A) (hereinafter “Iwao”) , wherein claims 4 & 6 are optionally further in view of Hayashi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0044223 A1) (hereinafter “Hayashi”).
Regarding claims 1-4 and 8, Cai teaches a glass composition for forming glass substrates having precision-formed through holes for electronics applications such as interposers and micro-LED devices [00003] comprising 40-80 mol% SiO2, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 70 mol% or 60-80 mol% [0007-0008, 00166], >0-15 mol% Al2O3, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 8 mol%, and while some emphasis is placed on it being <10 mol%, such as 4-9 mol%, it is not required feature of the invention [0007-0009, 00169, 00181], 0-15 mol% B2O3, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 5 mol%, and while some emphasis is placed on it being >6.5 mol%, such as 5-15 mol%, it is not required feature of the invention [0007-0009, 00170, 00181], >0-15 mol% MgO, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 5 mol% or 3-7 mol% [0007-0008, 00168], >0-10 mol% CaO, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 4 mol% or >0-5 mol% [0007-0008, 00168], >0-10 mol% SrO, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 2 mol% or >0-4 mol% [0007-0008, 00168], >0-15 mol% BaO, which may be any value or subrange within the broader range, such as 2 mol% or 5 mol% or >0-7 mol% [0007-0008, 00168], wherein the composition is essentially alkali-free (K2O + Na2O + Li2O ≈ ~0 mol%) [0002, 00148], wherein alkali metals are not actively added but present in very small amounts as a contaminant for example less than 500 ppm (~0.05 mol%) [00187], >0-5 mol% P2O5 or any value therein such as 1 mol% [00172], >0-5 mol%SnO2, such as 0-1 mol% [0007, 0173], less than 3 mol% of TiO2, such as 0-0.01 mol% [00173], and 0-3 mol% As2O3 and Sb2O3 such as 0-0.01 mol% of each or in combination with plurality of other components [00173].
In the event that the ranges of SiO2 (and B2O3/Al2O3) are not sufficiently motivated:
Guo teaches that glass compositions higher than 75 mol% provide a desirable effect of widening the waists of glass to reduce dissipation of electromagnetic energy as heat and provide a low loss angle/tangent as an interposer [0002-0006] due to the increased amount of SiO2 resulting in a decrease in byproducts and accumulation of insoluble solids (residue) that narrows the waist (decreasing cylindricality) [0069].
AND
Ellison teaches a draw down alkali-free boroaluminosilicate glass that allows for the capability to produce glass sheets usable as substrates without requiring costly post-forming finishing operations [0003], wherein the draw down process necessitates accounting for liquidus temperatures/viscosities, devitrification, strain point, and annealing point [0007, 0020-0021, 0045-0053] and specifically relates this to compositional requirements, such as a total concentration of alkali elements being less than 0.1 mol% being alkali-free due to it being difficult or economically impossible to entirely eliminate alkali metal oxides as a result of contamination of the raw materials or in refractories [0020], the SiO2 content being greater than 60 mol% and at a maximum of 80 mol% that will allow batch materials to be formed by the draw down process being melted using conventional, high volume techniques [0053-0054], Al2O3 having an overall range of 10 to 15 mol%, such as 11-13 mol%, and B2O3 having an overall range of 3-8 mol%, such as 4-6 mol% [0055, 0058] but really may be varied so long as they are in balance with each other and with the alkaline metal oxides (MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO) [0059], wherein an alkaline oxide content can be optimized to provide a draw down process comprising MgO greater than or equal to 3 mol%, CaO greater than or equal to 4 mol%, and BaO greater than or equal to 1 mol%, with fining performed without the use of substantially amounts of arsenic and antimony (no more than 0.005 mol%) [0072-0074, 0077, 0087].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide substantially cylindrical holes for an interposer an intermediate range between and/or partially overlapping using the combined teachings of Guo and Ellison and set within the boundaries of Cai’s given range, such as 70-80 mol% or 70-75 mol% or 75-80 mol%, or more importantly within the boundaries of the higher silica content examples disclosed by Cai such as 70-74 mol%, wherein it would have been important to maximize silica content to decrease residue within the holes and provide increased cylindricality/wider waists desirable in order to decrease dissipation of electromagnetic energy as heat and provide a low loss angle/tangent for interposers (or similar devices) [Guo] while also providing a glass composition that can be draw down processed using conventional, high volume equipment [Ellison].
Further regarding claims 2-4 and 9, regarding the B2O3 and Al2O3 content: using the process optimized and balanced ranges of Ellison, it would have been obvious how to further optimize the desired cylindricality-based ranges of the relatively higher boron oxide and relatively lower alumina content in Cai to be substantially within or near the claimed ranges and optimizable therefrom, such as 5-10 mol% for B2O3 and 7-12 mol% for Al2O3. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to achieve the desired etching conditions for cylindricality [Cai] while also providing a balanced melting/liquidus temperature and viscosity, while also maintaining a beneficial annealing point [Ellison, 0058] and a beneficial high liquidus viscosity and annealing point [Ellison, 0055] balanced with each other and the alkaline metal oxides to provide balanced formation and strength properties and to prevent devitrification and gaseous inclusions, respectively [Ellison, 0059].
In the event that the CuO is included:
Iwao teaches a glass substrate for laser assisted etching for forming holes suitable for use as an interposer [0000-0002], wherein inclusion of TiO2 and CuO are each reduced to less than 0.1 mol% for desirable UV transmittance, as it also prevents UV irradiation processing for mounting semiconductors when used as a glass substrate such as for interposers [0024].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art considering the CuO at the time invention to limit their inclusion to within the claimed ranges. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to promote ultraviolet light transmission [Iwao].
Further regarding claim 4, regarding the inclusion of TiO2: Hayashi teaches an alkali-free etchable glass suitable as a display substrate for a TFT [0001], wherein while including an extremely small amount of TiO2, such as 0.001 mol% or more, may allow for suppressing coloration, it is particularly preferably less than 0.03% as an ultraviolet light transmittance is liable to lower otherwise [0053], wherein Iwao corroborates that teaching and further teaches that CuO inclusion is reduced for this same purpose to less than 0.1 mol%, as it also prevents UV irradiation processing for mounting semiconductors when used as a glass substrate [0024].
Regarding claim 5, in an HF-based acid solution intended to etch the part at a rate of less than about 5 microns/min, such as about 2 microns per minute [0073, 00128], wherein an example comprises an HF-based acid solution etching rate of about 1 micron/min [00160].
Regarding claim 6, although the Cai does not disclose a temperature at which the composition comprises a high-temperature viscosity of 102.5 dPa·s, the claimed properties are deemed to be inherent to the structure in the prior art since Cai(/Guo/Ellison/Iwao) teach(es) an invention with a substantially similar structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention. Products of identical structure and composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on the Applicants to prove otherwise.
Alternatively, Hayashi evidences/teaches while an alkaline aluminoborosilicate glass is generally hard to melt it is generally desired as defects such as bubbles, foreign matter, or the like are reduced, wherein the melting temperature desired for a high-temperature viscosity of 102.5 dPa·s is preferably less 1,750 °C or less for excellent meltability [0075].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention when forming a nearly identical alkali-free alkaline aluminoborosilicate glass substrate to provide a temperature at the claimed viscosity within the claimed range. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide excellent meltability [0031].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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 J 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.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 November 22nd, 2025