Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/043,762

MULTI-LAYER BODY FOR DIFFUSE TRANSILLUMINATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 02, 2023
Examiner
DILLON, DANIEL P
Art Unit
1783
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Covestro Deutschland AG
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
25%
Grant Probability
At Risk
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 5m
To Grant
54%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 25% of cases
25%
Career Allow Rate
64 granted / 258 resolved
-40.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 5m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
312
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
66.7%
+26.7% vs TC avg
§102
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
§112
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 258 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/09/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-3, 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2004/0166323) in view of Seidel et al. (US 2019/0119491). Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a multilayer article comprising a coating layer comprising a block copolyestercarbonate (“a film consisting essentially of at least one of polycarbonate and copolycarbonate”), a second layer comprising a polymer having carbonate structural units, and a substrate layer (“a carrier layer”) (Paragraph [0008]). The second layer may further contain a colorant and an adhesive layer may be present between the second layer and the substrate layer wherein the adhesive layer has the same color as the second layer (“at least one layer consisting of a colorant or a colorant composition in contact with the carrier layer and covering at least a portion of the area between the carrier layer and a film”) (Paragraphs [0035]-[0036]). The substrate layer may be formed from a blend of materials including a PC/ABS blend (“a carrier layer composed of a thermoplastic molding compound”) (Paragraphs [0042]-[0047]). Wang is silent with respect to the PC/ABS blend of the substrate layer being the thermoplastic moulding compound required by claim 1. Seidel teaches a light-stable moulding compound which are anti-static and has a low-temperature toughness (Pg. 1, Paragraph [0001]). The compositions comprise (A) 50% to 90% of an aromatic polycarbonate and (B) 5% to 40% of a polymer containing at least one rubber-modified vinyl (co)polymer (Pg. 2, Paragraph [0021]-[0024]). The vinyl copolymer is formed from 80% to 95% of at least one vinyl monomer (“B.1”) and 5% to 20% by weight of an elastomeric polybutadiene graft base, which further has a glass transition point of less than 50 degrees (“B.2”) (Pg. 2, Paragraphs [0025]-[0026; Pg. 6, Paragraph [0137]). The vinyl copolymer also contains polybutadiene-containing rubber particles which have been grafted with the vinyl monomers above and contains inclusions of the vinyl copolymer consisting of the vinyl monomers above (“disperse phase i.1 and i.2”) (Pg. 2, Paragraph [0028]). The copolymer additionally includes a vinyl (co)polymer matrix consisting of the vinyl monomers above which is not bound to the rubber particles (“ii”) (Pg. 2, Paragraph [0029]). The copolymer additionally has a D50 of 0.3 to 10 microns measured by ultracentrifugation (Pg. 6, Paragraph [0132]). The composition may further include 0% to 20% of one or more additives (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0035]). The composition further includes no other rubber-modified vinyl copolymers (“wherein the thermoplastic molding compound contains less than 2% by weight of rubber-based graft polymers distinct from B)”) (Pg. 7, Paragraph [0148]). The polybutadiene content in each of the components is preferably 1.5% to 4.0% by weight (“the thermoplastic molding compound has a rubber content of at least 1.5% by weight”) (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0036]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the PC/ABS blend substrate layer of Wang from the compositions of Seidel which teaches compositions containing polycarbonate and a vinyl copolymer and provides anti-static and has a low-temperature toughness. Regarding claim 2, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Wang aims to provide the articles which long term color stability by providing transparency and attractiveness (“wherein the film is transilluminable”) (Paragraphs [0003]; [0031]). Regarding claim 3, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1. The coating layer may further include art-recognized additives (Paragraph [0031]). Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1.The coating layer may have a thickness of 2 to 2500 microns (2 microns to 2.5 mm) (Paragraph [0032]). Regarding claim 8, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Wang is silent with respect to the second layer having a visual transmittance of at most 10% as determined according to DIN/ISO 13468-2, 2006 Version, with a D65 light source and an angle to the observer of 10°. However, this property appears to be dependent on the colorant and/or the colorant composition such that compounds or compositions which are significantly identical cannot have different properties. MPEP 2112.01: "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In the instant case, applicant’s specification describes these subregions having the colorant compositions formed from a binder, including thermoplastic polycarbonates, and an organic and/or an inorganic dye or pigment (PGPUB, Pg. 7, Paragraphs [0131]-[0150]). As discussed above, Wang teaches the second layer being formed from polycarbonate structural units and a suitable colorant. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the significantly identical compositions between the second layer of Wang and that of applicant’s invention would have significantly identical properties, including, but not limited to having a visual transmittance of at most 10% as determined according to DIN/ISO 13468-2, 2006 Version, with a D65 light source and an angle to the observer of 10°. Regarding claim 9, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1. As discussed above, the compositions comprise (A) 50% to 90% of an aromatic polycarbonate and (B) 5% to 40% of a polymer containing at least one rubber-modified vinyl (co)polymer, which respectively correspond to components A and B of claim 1. Additionally, the compositions comprise components (C)-(E) which total to 3% to 47% by weight of the compositions (Pg. 2, Paragraphs [0033]-[0035]). Regarding claim 10, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1. As discussed above, Seidel teaches the polybutadiene content in each of the components is preferably 1.5% to 4.0% by weight. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2004/0166323) in view of Seidel et al. (US 2019/0119491) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hermans et al. (WO 2018/046697). Regarding claim 7, Wang teaches the articles as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Wang further teaches the articles being utilize for automobiles (Paragraph [0061]). The substrate layer may also have any suitable thickness provided the articles can be processed into a final desired form (Paragraph [0042]). Wang is silent with respect to the substrate having a thickness of 1 to 5 mm. Hermans teaches a substrate comprising a polycarbonate and ABS blend (Paragraph [011]). The substrate may be used in the automotive field and has a thickness of 1 to 8 mm (Paragraph [02]; [087]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the substrates of Wang, which are used in the automotive industry, with a thickness of 1 to 8 mm as taught by Hermans, which also teaches a PC/ABS blend for a substrate in the automotive field. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2004/0166323) in view of Seidel et al. (WO 2019/170569) with (US 2020/0407547) as an English language translation. Regarding claim 16, Wang teaches a multilayer article comprising a coating layer comprising a block copolyestercarbonate (“a film consisting essentially of at least one of polycarbonate and copolycarbonate”), a second layer comprising a polymer having carbonate structural units, and a substrate layer (“a carrier layer”) (Paragraph [0008]). The second layer may further contain a colorant and an adhesive layer may be present between the second layer and the substrate layer wherein the adhesive layer has the same color as the second layer (“at least one layer consisting of a colorant or a colorant composition in contact with the carrier layer and covering at least a portion of the area between the carrier layer and a film”) (Paragraphs [0035]-[0036]). The substrate layer may be formed from a blend of materials including a PC/ABS blend (“a carrier layer composed of a thermoplastic molding compound”) (Paragraphs [0042]-[0047]). Wang is silent with respect to the PC/ABS blend of the substrate layer being the thermoplastic moulding compound required by claim 16. Seidel teaches compositions which has improvements over compositions of pure polycarbonate including melt flowability, stress cracking, toughness, stiffness and heat resistance (Pg. 1, Paragraphs [0004]-[0007]). The compositions include an aromatic polycarbonate and a rubber-modified vinyl copolymer (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0032]-[0033]). The vinyl copolymer is formed from 80% to 95% of at least one vinyl monomer (“B.1”) and 5% to 20% by weight of an elastomeric polybutadiene graft base, which further has a glass transition point of less than 50 degrees and contains at least 50% by weight base on B.2 of structural units derived from 1,3 butadiene (“B.2”) (Pg. 3, Paragraphs [0034]-[0035]). The rubber-modified vinyl (co)polymer B contains a disperse phase of rubber particles grafted with vinyl (co)polymer composite of structural units B.1 and vinyl (co)polymer likewise composed of structural units of B.1 enclosed in the rubber particles as a separate disperse phase (“i.1 and i.2”) (Pg. 3, Paragraphs [0036]-[0039]). The copolymer additionally includes a rubber-free vinyl (co)polymer matrix consisting of structural units of B.1 which is not bonded to the rubber particles and is not enclosed in these rubber particles (“ii”) (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0040]). The disperse phase of (i) has a median diameter D50 measured by ultracentrifugation of 0.3 to 2.0 μm and optionally at least one further component selected from polymer additives and polymeric blend partners (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0041]-[0042]). The component B has a polybutadiene content of 5 to 18% by weight and includes no other graft polymers other than B.1 and B.2 (Pg. 6, Paragraphs [0106]; [0109]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the PC/ABS blend of the susbtrate layer of Wang from the compositions of Seidel which teaches improvements over compositions of pure polycarbonate including melt flowability, stress cracking, toughness, stiffness and heat resistance. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2004/0166323) in view of Seidel et al. (WO 2019/170569) with (US 2020/0407547) as an English language translation. Regarding claim 17, Wang teaches a multilayer article comprising a coating layer comprising a block copolyestercarbonate (“a film consisting essentially of at least one of polycarbonate and copolycarbonate”), a second layer comprising a polymer having carbonate structural units, and a substrate layer (“a carrier layer”) (Paragraph [0008]). The second layer may further contain a colorant and an adhesive layer may be present between the second layer and the substrate layer wherein the adhesive layer has the same color as the second layer (“at least one layer consisting of a colorant or a colorant composition in contact with the carrier layer and covering at least a portion of the area between the carrier layer and a film”) (Paragraphs [0035]-[0036]). The substrate layer may be formed from a blend of materials including a PC/ABS blend (“a carrier layer composed of a thermoplastic molding compound”) (Paragraphs [0042]-[0047]). Wang is silent with respect to the PC/ABS blend of the substrate layer being the thermoplastic moulding compound required by claim 17. Seidel teaches compositions which has improvements over compositions of pure polycarbonate including melt flowability, stress cracking, toughness, stiffness and heat resistance (Pg. 1, Paragraphs [0004]-[0007]). The compositions include an aromatic polycarbonate and a rubber-modified vinyl copolymer (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0032]-[0033]). The vinyl copolymer is formed from 80% to 95% of at least one vinyl monomer (“B.1”) and 5% to 20% by weight of an elastomeric polybutadiene graft base, which further has a glass transition point of less than 50 degrees and contains at least 50% by weight base on B.2 of structural units derived from 1,3 butadiene (“B.2”) (Pg. 3, Paragraphs [0034]-[0035]). The rubber-modified vinyl (co)polymer B contains a disperse phase of rubber particles grafted with vinyl (co)polymer composite of structural units B.1 and vinyl (co)polymer likewise composed of structural units of B.1 enclosed in the rubber particles as a separate disperse phase (“i.1 and i.2”) (Pg. 3, Paragraphs [0036]-[0039]). The copolymer additionally includes a rubber-free vinyl (co)polymer matrix consisting of structural units of B.1 which is not bonded to the rubber particles and is not enclosed in these rubber particles (“ii”) (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0040]). The disperse phase of (i) has a median diameter D50 measured by ultracentrifugation of 0.3 to 2.0 μm and optionally at least one further component selected from polymer additives and polymeric blend partners (Pg. 3, Paragraph [0041]-[0042]). The component B has a polybutadiene content of 5 to 18% by weight and includes no other graft polymers other than B.1 and B.2 (Pg. 6, Paragraphs [0106]; [0109]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the PC/ABS blend of the susbtrate layer of Wang from the compositions of Seidel which teaches improvements over compositions of pure polycarbonate including melt flowability, stress cracking, toughness, stiffness and heat resistance. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On pages 7-9, applicant argues that the amendment requiring at least one layer consisting of a colorant or a colorant composition in contact with the carrier layer overcomes the most recent rejection. The instant invention is preferably formed from an insert molding process which results in only the three-layer configuration presented in figure 1. This is contrary to the teachings of Wang which requires an adhesive layer between the second layer and the substrate layer and, as such, the second layer cannot contact the substrate layer. The examiner is not persuaded by applicant’s arguments such that the claim language “at least one layer consisting of a colorant or a colorant composition” indicates that there may be more than one layer present. Wang further teaches that adhesive tie layers may have the same color as the second layer (Paragraph [0036]). As such, the tie layers may be considered to be one of the at least one layers of layer (II) and results in direct contact with the substrate layer. Even further, the claim does not require the film insert molding process argued by applicant resulting in only the three layers. The claim only requires contact being made between the layer consisting of the colorant composition and the carrier layer. However, the claim does not require these two layers being in direct contact with each other without an intervening layer, such as an adhesive layer bringing the two layers into contact with each other. This is the case with Wang such that the second layer having a colorant is brought into contact with the substrate via an adhesive layer. Therefore, the examiner contends that the amendment does not overcome the teachings of Wang such that the claim does not require direct contact without the presence of an intervening layer and the second layer of the instant claim may be formed from multiple layers. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL P DILLON whose telephone number is (571)270-5657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 8 AM to 5 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MARIA V 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. /DANIEL P DILLON/Examiner, Art Unit 1783 /MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 02, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 16, 2024
Response Filed
Jun 18, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 10, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 28, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 29, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 17, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12558705
POLYMER FILM USING CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION USING SULFUR AS INITIATOR (SCVD), METHOD OF PREPARING THE SAME AND APPARATUS FOR PREPARING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12529185
ARTIFICIAL LEATHER AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12515439
ELASTIC LAMINATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12516410
DIELECTRIC FILLED NANOSTRUCTURED SILICA SUBSTRATE FOR FLAT OPTICAL DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12496812
A VISIBLE PART HAVING A LAYER STRUCTURE FOR AN OPERATING PART OR A DECORATIVE TRIM WITH BETTER PROTECTION AS A RESULT OF A PROTECTIVE PAINT COATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
25%
Grant Probability
54%
With Interview (+29.2%)
4y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 258 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month