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 .
This action is responsive to the amendment filed on November 3, 2025.
Claims 1-14 are pending. Claims 1-4, 7 are currently amended. Claims 12-14 are newly added.
The objection of claims 1-3 is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C.112(b) is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C.112(b) is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanabiki et al is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 4-5, 7-7, 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabiki et al is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 14 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
The original claims 1-13 and claim 14 are related as mutually exclusive species in an intermediate-final product relationship. Distinctness is proven for claims in this relationship if the intermediate product is useful to make other than the final product, and the species are patentably distinct (MPEP § 806.05(j)). In the instant case, the intermediate product is deemed to be useful as a coating composition for an optical substrate and the inventions are deemed patentably distinct because there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 14 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabiki et al (US Patent Application 2013/0274405 (already of record)) in view of Phang (US Patent Application 2014/0044869).
Regarding claims 1-13, Tanabiki et al teaches a composition comprising an absorbent polymer (P-2), isobornyl acrylate, KRM 8200 (urethane acrylate oligomer), photoinitiator and organic solvent and then curing on a substrate (Table 1, Example 9). Tanabiki et al further teaches other acrylate monomers such as tripropylene glycol diacrylate (Paragraph 39). Tanabiki et al further teaches EBECRYL 1290 and 8402 (which satisfies a hexafunctional aliphatic urethane acrylate and aliphatic urethane diacrylate) (Paragraph 42). Tanabiki et al further teaches photoinitiators including benzyl dimethyl ketal, 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-phenylpropan-1-one, benzophenone and thioxanthone (Paragraph 53). Tanabiki et al further teaches triethanolamine (which satisfies claimed co-initiator) (Paragraph 53). Tanabiki et al further teaches the inclusion of water or organic solvent diluents (Paragraph 35). Tanabiki et al further teaches the water absorbing resin composition is usable as an anti-fog coating resin composition (Paragraph 74). However, Tanabiki et al fails to specifically disclose sodium polyacrylate and 0.1-3wt% of nonionic surfactant.
In the same field of endeavor, Phang teaches an anti-fog composition that comprises a superabsorbent polymer along with a wetting agent dissolved in a solvent (Abstract). Phang further teaches superabsorbent polymers/water absorbent polymers that are able to absorb at least 5 times the weight of the polymer in water including acrylates, acrylonitrile, amides and copolymers containing these monomeric groups (Paragraph 10). Phang further teaches sodium polyacrylate (Examples). Phang further teaches a nonionic surfactant in the amount of 0.1-3wt% (Paragraph 13, Table 1).
With regard to sodium polyacrylate, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided sodium polyacrylate in Tanabiki et al in view of Phang in order to provide absorbent/superabsorbent polymers that are able to absorb at least 5 times their weight into the composition and the broad teachings of Tanabiki et al already encompass absorbent polymers in the composition. It is well settled that it is prima facie obvious to combine two ingredients, each of which is targeted by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose. In re Linder 457 F,2d 506,509, 173 USPQ 356, 359 (CCPA 1972).
With regard to 0.1-3wt% of nonionic surfactant, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided 0.1-3wt% of nonionic surfactant in Tanabiki et al in view of Phang et al in order to provide a dispersing agent in the composition as Tanabiki et al encompasses the incorporation of addition additives such as dispersing agents (Paragraph 58).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-13 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TANISHA DIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-7730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday and Friday, 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/TANISHA DIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 February 12, 2026