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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
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 1-2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokinoya et al. (US 2016/0195229) (‘229) in view of Tokinoya (US 2019/0202180) (‘180) and Fuji (JP 2008-073993).
Regarding claim 1, Tokinoya (‘229) teaches a wavelength conversion sheet with a barrier film having good barrier properties and transparency and can well exhibit the performance of quantum dots (Paragraph [0013]). The barrier films are formed from a barrier layer on a PET film wherein the barrier layer comprises an inorganic oxide layer and a gas barrier layer (Paragraph [0033]; Fig. 1). The inorganic oxide layers may be aluminum oxide (Paragraph [0035]). The barrier layers may also comprise an alternating configuration of the inorganic oxide layer and the gas barrier layer as shown in figure 3 having the structure of PET Film/IO Layer/GB Layer/IO Layer/GB Layer (“a substrate; a first AlOx-deposited layer; a gas barrier intermediate layer; a second AlOx-deposited layer; a gas barrier coating layer”) (Paragraph [0053]). The inorganic oxide layers have thicknesses of 10 to 500 nm and the gas barrier layers have thicknesses of 100 to 500 nm, both overlapping with the instantly claimed ranges (Paragraphs [0036]-[0037]).
Tokinoya (‘229) is silent with respect to the gas barrier layers having a first complex modulus of 7 to 11 GPa at a measurement temperature of 25°C and a second complex modulus of 5 to 8 GPa at a measurement temperature of 60°C, the first and second complex moduli being measured by nanoindentation.
However, this property appears to be dependent on the materials for forming the gas barrier layers such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that identical compositions would have identical 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, it appears as though the gas barrier coating layer is formed from the compositions described in paragraphs [0045]-[0054] of the Instant Specification (PGPUB). This includes a hydroxyl group-containing polymer compound, metal alkoxides, silane coupling agents, and hydrolysates thereof. A preferable example of the metal alkoxide appears to be tetraethoxysilane and triisopropoxyaluminum (Paragraphs [0046]-[0048]). Furthermore, the claim requires the gas barrier coating layers to be formed by drying a composition comprising the hydroxyl group-containing polymer compound, metal alkoxides, silane coupling agents, and hydrolysates thereof.
Tokinoya (‘229) teaches the gas barrier layers as being formed from hydroxyl group-containing polymer compounds, metal alkoxides, metal alkoxide hydrolysates, and metal alkoxide polymeric materials (Paragraph [0037]).
Tokinoya (‘229) is silent with respect to the specific compositions of the metal oxides described in the instant specification.
Tokinoya (‘180) teaches gas barrier films including a substrate and a gas barrier layer (Paragraph [0012]). The gas barrier layer provides secondary damage prevention and additional gas barrier properties and is formed from a metal alkoxide which is identical to that of applicant’s preferred compounds including the metal oxides being tetraethoxysilane and triisopropoxyaluminum (Paragraphs [0048]-[0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the gas barrier layers formed from metal oxides of Tokinoya (‘229) from the metal oxides of Tokinoya (‘180) which are identical to applicant’s metal oxides and provide secondary damage prevention and additional gas barrier properties.
Tokinoya (‘229) is silent with respect to the gas barrier layers being formed by drying the compositions as discussed above.
Fuji teaches a gas barrier laminate film which includes a substrate, an inorganic oxide layer and a gas barrier layer formed from a metal alkoxide and hydrolysate thereof (Paragraphs [0001]; [0007]). The metal alkoxide may be tetraethoxysilane (Paragraph [0031]). Additionally, the gas barrier compositions comprising the metal alkoxides may be roll coated and heated and dried at a temperature of 50 to 250°C for 0.3 seconds to 60 minutes in order to cause condensation resulting in the formation of the gas barrier coating (Paragraph [0077]). The combination of the formation of the gas barrier coating via condensation and vapor deposition of inorganic oxide layers forms chemical bonds between the layers resulting in better adhesion and allows for a synergistic effect of providing even further improved gas barrier properties (Paragraph [0077]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the gas barrier layers of Tokinoya (‘229), which are formed from metal alkoxides, such that the layers are formed via a condensation reaction by heating and drying at a temperature range of 50 to 250°C for 0.3 seconds to 60 minutes resulting in better adhesion with an inorganic oxide layer and allowing for a synergistic effect of providing even further improved gas barrier properties as taught by Fuji.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the substantially identical structures would have substantially identical, or overlapping, properties, including having a first complex modulus of 7 to 11 GPa at a measurement temperature of 25°C and a second complex modulus of 5 to 8 GPa at a measurement temperature of 60°C, the first and second complex moduli being measured by nanoindentation.
Regarding claim 2, Tokinoya (‘229) teaches the wavelength conversion sheets as discussed above with respect to claim 1. As discussed above, the gas barrier layers are formed from the same compositions as applicant’s claimed gas barrier coating layer and would, therefore, have the same properties. This includes having a first hardness of 1.15 to 1.70 GPa at a measurement temperature of 25°C and a second hardness of 0.85 to 1.30 GPa at a measurement temperature of 60°C, the first and second hardnesses being measured by nanoindentation.
Regarding claim 5, Tokinoya (‘229) teaches the wavelength conversion films as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Tokinoya further teaches the gas barrier films sandwiching a phosphor layer shown in figure 1 (Paragraph [0029]).
Regarding claim 6, Tokinoya (‘229) teaches the wavelength conversion films as discussed above with respect to claim 1. As discussed above, the gas barrier films are formed via a condensation reaction by heating and drying a gas barrier composition comprising a tetraethoxysilane at a temperature of 50 to 250°C for 0.3 seconds to 60 minutes resulting in better adhesion with an inorganic oxide layer and allowing for a synergistic effect of providing even further improved gas barrier properties as taught by Fuji. It is further noted that this range taught by Fuji overlaps with that of the instantly claimed range. MPEP 2144.05: 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).
Regarding claim 7, Tokinoya (‘229) teaches the wavelength conversion films as discussed above with respect to claim 6. As discussed above, the metal alkoxide may be tetraethoxysilane and the gas barrier films may be heated and dried at a temperature of 50 to 250°C for 0.3 seconds to 60 minutes. Tokinoya further teaches the thickness of the inorganic oxide layers being 10 to 500 nm and the thickness of the gas barrier layers may be 100 to 500 nm, both of which overlap with the claimed ranges (Paragraph [0036]-[0037]). Lastly, as discussed above, the combination of Tokinoya (‘229), Tokinoya (‘180) and Fuji teaches substantially identical structures as applicant’s claimed inventions and, as a result, would have overlapping properties as well, including a first complex modulus of 7.3 to 10.7 GPa and a second complex modulus of 5.2 to 7.8 GPa.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokinoya et al. (US 2016/0195229) (‘229) in view of Tokinoya (US 2019/0202180) (‘180) and Fuji (JP 2008-073993) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sato et al. (US 2018/0323401).
Regarding claim 3, Tokinoya (‘229) teaches the wavelength conversion films as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Tokinoya (‘229) is silent with respect to the PET films being subjected to a plasma treatment.
Sato teaches a laminate and a gas barrier film (Paragraph [0002]). The laminates include a substrate, an undercoat layer (inorganic oxide), a functional layer, and an overcoat layer (inorganic oxide) and the substrate may be PET (Paragraphs [0090]-[0097]). The surface of the substrate attached to the undercoat layer may be subjected to plasma treatment in order to enhance adhesion to the undercoat layer (Paragraph [0187]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to form the PET film and the inorganic oxide layer of Tokinoya (‘229) such that a plasma treatment is performed to the PET film in order to enhance adhesion to the inorganic oxide layer as taught by Sato.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to claim 1, see pages 4-6, filed 08/07/2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
On pages 4-6, applicant argues that the combination of references fails to teach a first complex modulus of 7-11 GPa and a second complex modulus of 5 to 8 GPa such that the rejection relies on inherency. As shown in tables 1 and 2 illustrating the examples of the instant specification, Examples 1, 5 and 6 use the same materials as Comparative Examples 1 and 4 with the only difference being a drying temperature which is now required by the instant claim via the limitation of “the gas barrier coating layer is a layer formed by drying a composition for forming the gas barrier coating layer, the composition containing at least one member selected from the group consisting of hydroxyl group-containing polymer compounds, metal alkoxides, silane coupling agents, and hydrolysates thereof.” Therefore, the rejection cannot rely on inherency in order to teach the first and second complex modulus properties of claim 1.
Firstly, it is noted that the amendment to claim 1 only requires drying the gas barrier composition, but fails to teach any specific range for the drying temperature which results in the claimed properties. Nevertheless, neither of the Tokinoya references teaches the heating and drying of the gas barrier composition to form the gas barrier coating layer. Therefore, the rejection is withdrawn. However, a new ground of rejection is made in further view of Fuji which teaches a gas barrier layer formed via a condensation reaction by heating and drying at a temperature range of 50 to 250°C for 0.3 seconds to 60 minutes resulting in better adhesion with an inorganic oxide layer and allowing for a synergistic effect of providing even further improved gas barrier properties.
As such, now the combination teaches an identical structure as the claimed invention which is further formed in a substantially identical manner, being heating and drying in a temperature range of 50 to 250°C for 0.3 seconds to 60 minutes which overlaps with the time and temperatures described in the examples of the instant specification. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect for the gas barrier films of the combination of Tokinoya (‘229), Tokinoya (‘180) and Fuji would also have, at the very least, overlapping properties with the claimed invention. This includes the first complex modulus being between 7 and 11 GPa and a second complex modulus being between 5 and 8 GPa.
Additionally, it is noted that the applicant only argues that the drying temperatures are different, but fails to argue what specific drying temperature is critical in achieving the claimed properties. As noted above, the claim only requires the gas barrier layers to be formed by drying a coating composition. Additionally, paragraph [0056] (PGPUB version) describes the drying temperature of 50°C to 150°C as a suitable drying temperature and the temperature range of 50 to 250°C taught by Fuji still overlaps with what is taught in the instant specification.
Ultimately, the examiner finds the amendments to the claim requiring a gas barrier coating to be dried to be persuasive in overcoming the previous rejection in view of Tokinoya (‘229) and Tokinoya (‘180) and a new rejection is made in further view of Fuji which teaches an overlapping range for the drying temperature taught in the instant specification, which would result in overlapping properties for the first and second complex moduli.
The current rejection is made FINAL in view of the amendments to the claims.
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 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
Prosecution Insights