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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuang (US20150203395, hereinafter referred to as Kuang).
Regarding claim 1, Kuang discloses an optical glass (see Kuang at the Abstract, disclosing an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 3.8 wt.% SiO2); 3-18% of B2O3 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 9 wt.% B2O3); 45-65% of La2O3 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 48 wt.% La2O3); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 1.1 wt.% Y2O3); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 5.5 wt.% ZrO2); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 8 wt.% Nb2O5); 5-20% of TiO2 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 13.2 wt.% TiO2).
Regarding claim 2, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 0% Ta2O5).
Regarding claim 3, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, and one or more of the following 7 conditions are satisfied: 1) (Ta2O5+Gd2O3) /Y2O3 is below 1.0; 2) La2O3/(RO+Nb2O5+Gd2O3) is 3.0-14.0; 3) (Gd2O3+ZnO) /Y2O3 is below 1.0; 4) (WO3+Gd2O3) /TiO2 is below 2.0; 5) La2O3/(Y2O3+Al2O3) is 4.0-30.0; 6) La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) is 3.0-15.0; 7) (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5 is 0.5-5.0, and the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 9.4 wt.% Gd2O3, 0.5 wt.% ZnO, and 13.2 wt.% TiO2, for a value of (Gd2O3+ZnO)/TiO2 of (9.4+0.5)/13.2= 0.75, which is within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 4, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, and one or more of the following 7 conditions are satisfied: 1) (Ta2O5+Gd2O3)/Y2O3 is below 0.8; 2) La2O3/(RO+Nb2O5+Gd2O3) is 4.0-12.0; 3) (Gd2O3+ZnO)/Y2O3 is below 0.8; 4) (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 is below 1.5; 5) La2O3/(Y2O3+Al2O3) is 5.0-20.0; 6) La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) is 4.0-10.0; 7) (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5 is 0.8-3.5, and the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 9.4 wt.% Gd2O3, 0.5 wt.% ZnO, and 13.2 wt.% TiO2, for a value of (Gd2O3+ZnO)/TiO2 of (9.4+0.5)/13.2= 0.75, which is within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 5, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, and one or more of the following 7 conditions are satisfied: 1) (Ta2O5+Gd2O3)/Y2O3 is below 0.5; 2) La2O3/(RO+Nb2O5+Gd2O3) is 5.0-9.0; 3) (Gd2O3+ZnO)/Y2O3 is below 0.5; 4) (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 is below 1.0; 5) La2O3/(Y2O3+Al2O3) is 7.0-15.0; 6) La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) is 5.0-8.0; 7) (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5 is 1.0-2.5, and the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 48 wt.% La2O3, 0% Ta2O5, and 8 wt.% Nb2O5, for a value of La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) of 48/(0+8)= 6, which is within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 6, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, and one or more of the following 7 conditions are satisfied:1) (Ta2O5+Gd2O3)/Y2O3 is below 0.2; 2) La2O3/(RO+Nb2O5+Gd2O3) is 5.2-7.5; 3) (Gd2O3+ZnO)/Y2O3 is below 0.2; 4) (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 is below 0.5; 5) La2O3/(Y2O3+Al2O3) is 8.0-11.0; 6) La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) is 5.5-7.5; 7) (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5 is 1.2-2.0, and the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 48 wt.% La2O3, 0% Ta2O5, and 8 wt.% Nb2O5, for a value of La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) of 48/(0+8)= 6, which is within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 3.8 wt.% SiO2).
Regarding claim 8, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 3.8 wt.% SiO2).
Regarding claim 9, Kuang discloses wherein components thereof do not contain Ta2O5; and/or do not contain ZnO; and/or do not contain Rn2O; and/or do not contain Gd2O3; and/or do not contain Yb2O3; and/or do not contain GeO2, and the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass comprising 0% Ta2O5).
Regarding claim 10, Kuang discloses a refractive index nd of the optical glass is above 1.97 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass with a refractive index Nd of 2.00980), and an Abbe number vd is 26-33 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass with an Abbe number Vd of 28.95).
Regarding claim 11, Kuang discloses the refractive index nd of the optical glass is 1.99-2.10 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass with a refractive index Nd of 2.00980), and the Abbe number vd is 27-32 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass with an Abbe number Vd of 28.95).
Regarding claim 12, Kuang discloses the refractive index nd of the optical glass is 1.995-2.02 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass with a refractive index Nd of 2.00980), and the Abbe number vd is 28-31 (see Kuang at Table 4, Example 31, disclosing an example of a glass with an Abbe number Vd of 28.95).
Regarding claim 13, while Kuang does not explicitly disclose the weather resistance CR is above Class 2, this is a property which depends upon the composition of the glass. The instant specification at [0031] discloses if the content of Y2O3 exceeds 13%, the chemical stability and weather resistance of the glass will deteriorate. The instant specification at [0036] discloses If the content of Nb2O5 exceeds 18%, the thermal stability and weather resistance of the glass will be reduced. The instant specification at [0037], discloses (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5, is controlled to be within a range of 0.5-5.0, which is beneficial to increasing the hardness and weather resistance of the glass. The instant specification at [0043] discloses (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 is controlled to be below 2.0, which can increase the weather resistance. The instant specification at [0048] discloses La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) is controlled to be within a range of 5.0-8.0, which can also further reduce the thermal expansion coefficient of the glass and increase the weather resistance. Example 31 at Table 4 discloses a Y2O3 content of 1.1 wt.%, an Nb2O5 content of 8 wt.%, a (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5 value of (3.8+9)/8= 1.6, a (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 content of (0+9.4)/13.2= 0.71. Because the composition of Kuang is substantially identical to the instantly disclosed composition, the composition of Kuang would inherently possess the claimed weather resistance. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established (see MPEP 2112.01(I) first paragraph).
Regarding claim 14, while Kuang does not explicitly disclose the weather resistance CR is above Class 2, this is a property which depends upon the composition of the glass. The instant specification at [0031] discloses if the content of Y2O3 exceeds 13%, the chemical stability and weather resistance of the glass will deteriorate. The instant specification at [0036] discloses If the content of Nb2O5 exceeds 18%, the thermal stability and weather resistance of the glass will be reduced. The instant specification at [0037], discloses (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5, is controlled to be within a range of 0.5-5.0, which is beneficial to increasing the hardness and weather resistance of the glass. The instant specification at [0043] discloses (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 is controlled to be below 2.0, which can increase the weather resistance. The instant specification at [0048] discloses La2O3/(Ta2O5+Nb2O5) is controlled to be within a range of 5.0-8.0, which can also further reduce the thermal expansion coefficient of the glass and increase the weather resistance. Example 31 at Table 4 discloses a Y2O3 content of 1.1 wt.%, an Nb2O5 content of 8 wt.%, a (SiO2+B2O3)/Nb2O5 value of (3.8+9)/8= 1.6, a (WO3+Gd2O3)/TiO2 content of (0+9.4)/13.2= 0.71. Because the composition of Kuang is substantially identical to the instantly disclosed composition, the composition of Kuang would inherently possess the claimed weather resistance. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established (see MPEP 2112.01(I) first paragraph).
Regarding claim 15, Kuang discloses a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see Kuang at [0001], disclosing a preform).
Regarding claim 16, Kuang discloses an optical element, made of the optical glass (See Kuang at [0018], disclosing an optical element).
Regarding claim 17, Kuang discloses an optical instrument, comprising the optical glass, and/or the optical element made of the optical glass or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (See Kuang at [0019], disclosing an optical instrument made of the high refractivity and high dispersion optical glass.).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 15-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 10-12 of U.S. Patent No. 9,487,432. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, the ‘432 patent claims an optical glass (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 13 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). The ‘432 patent further claims 3-18% of B2O3 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 6 wt % to 15 wt % of B2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 45-65% of La2O3 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 35 wt % to 60 wt % of La2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 10 wt % of Y2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 2 wt % to 10 wt % of ZrO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 15 wt % of Nb2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range); 5-20% of TiO2 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 5 wt % to 22 wt % of TiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘432 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 8 wt % of WO3 which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘432 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 13 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘432 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘432 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 13 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘432 patent claims a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘432 patent at claim 10).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘432 patent claims an optical element, made of the optical glass, or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘432 patent at claim 11).
Regarding claim 17, the ‘432 patent claims an optical instrument, comprising the optical glass, and/or the optical element made of the optical glass or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘432 patent at claim 12).
Claims 1-2, 7-9, and 15-16 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 9-10 of U.S. Patent No. 10,442,722. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, the ‘722 patent claims an optical glass (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 20 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). The ‘722 patent further claims 3-18% of B2O3 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 30 wt % of B2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 45-65% of La2O3 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 25 wt % to 55 wt % of La2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 25 wt % of Y2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 20 wt % of ZrO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 10 wt % of Nb2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range); 5-20% of TiO2 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 10 wt % of TiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘722 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 10 wt % of WO3 which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘722 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 20 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘722 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 20 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 9, the ‘722 patent claims wherein components thereof do not contain Ta2O5; and/or do not contain ZnO; and/or do not contain Rn2O; and/or do not contain Gd2O3; and/or do not contain Yb2O3; and/or do not contain GeO2 , and the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O (see the ‘722 patent at claim 1 claiming Yb2O3: 0-10%, which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘722 patent claims a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘722 patent at claim 9).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘722 patent claims an optical element, made of the optical glass, or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘722 patent at claim 10).
Claims 1-2, 7-9, and 15-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8-9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,259,738. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, the ‘738 patent claims an optical glass (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 20 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). The ‘738 patent further claims 3-18% of B2O3 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 30 wt % of B2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 45-65% of La2O3 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 25 wt % to 55 wt % of La2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming greater than 0 to 25 wt % of Y2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 20 wt % of ZrO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 30 wt % of Nb2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range); 5-20% of TiO2 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming greater than 0 wt % to 10 wt % of TiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘738 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 10 wt % of WO3 which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘738 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 20 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘738 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 20 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 9, the ‘738 patent claims wherein components thereof do not contain Ta2O5; and/or do not contain ZnO; and/or do not contain Rn2O; and/or do not contain Gd2O3; and/or do not contain Yb2O3; and/or do not contain GeO2 , and the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O (see the ‘738 patent at claim 1 claiming Yb2O3: 0-10%, which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘738 patent claims a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘738 patent at claim 8).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘738 patent claims an optical element, made of the optical glass, or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘738 patent at claim 9).
Claims 1-2 and 7-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9-10, 14, 16-17 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,878,938. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, the ‘938 patent claims an optical glass (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). The ‘938 patent further claims 3-18% of B2O3 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 5 wt % to 25 wt % of B2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 45-65% of La2O3 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 25 wt % to 45 wt % of La2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming greater than 0 to 10 wt % of Y2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 15 wt % of ZrO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 wt % to 8.5 wt % of Nb2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range); 5-20% of TiO2 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming greater than 0 wt % to 5 wt % of TiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘938 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 7 wt % of WO3 which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘938 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘938 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 9, the ‘938 patent claims wherein components thereof do not contain Ta2O5; and/or do not contain ZnO; and/or do not contain Rn2O; and/or do not contain Gd2O3; and/or do not contain Yb2O3; and/or do not contain GeO2 , and the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O (see the ‘938 patent at claim 1 claiming 0 to 15 wt % of Ta2O5, which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 10, the ‘938 patent claims a refractive index nd of the optical glass is above 1.97 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 9, claiming a refractive index of the optical glass is more than 1.86, which overlaps with the claimed range), and an Abbe number vd is 26-33 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 9, claiming an abbe number thereof is more than 38.8, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 11, the ‘938 patent claims the refractive index nd of the optical glass is 1.99-2.10 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 9, claiming a refractive index of the optical glass is more than 1.86, which overlaps with the claimed range), and the Abbe number vd is 27-32 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 9, claiming an abbe number thereof is more than 38.8, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 12, the ‘938 patent claims the refractive index nd of the optical glass is 1.995-2.02 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 9, claiming a refractive index of the optical glass is more than 1.86, which overlaps with the claimed range), and the Abbe number vd is 28-31 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 9, claiming an abbe number thereof is more than 38.8, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 13, the ‘938 patent claims a thermal expansion coefficient α20/120°C of the optical glass is below 90x10-7/K; and/or water resistance stability DW is above Class 2; and/or acid resistance stability DA is above Class 2; and/or weather resistance CR is above Class 2; and/or Knoop hardness HK is above 670x107 Pa; and/or Young's modulus E is above 11000x107Pa; and/or λ70 is below 450nm; and/or λ5 is below 390nm; and/or abrasion degree FA is 70-120; and/or bubble degree is above Grade A (see the ‘938 patent at claim 14, claiming an extent of bubble of not lower than grade A).
Regarding claim 14, the ‘938 patent claims the thermal expansion coefficient α20/120°C of the optical glass is below 80x 10-7/K; and/or water resistance stability DW is Class 1; and/or acid resistance stability DA is Class 1; and/or weather resistance CR is Class 1; and/or Knoop hardness HK is above 690x107Pa;and/or Young's modulus E is above 12800x 107Pa; and/or λ70 is below 440nm; and/or λ5 is below 380nm; and/or abrasion degree FA is 85-105; and/or bubble degree is Grade A00 (see the ‘938 patent at claim 10, claiming λ70 of the optical glass is not more than 420 nm, and λ5 thereof is not more than 360 nm, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘938 patent claims a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘938 patent at claim 16).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘938 patent claims an optical element, made of the optical glass, or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘938 patent at claim 17).
Regarding claim 17, the ‘938 patent claims an optical instrument, comprising the optical glass, and/or the optical element made of the optical glass or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘938 patent at claim 19).
Claims 1-2, and 7-17 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 14-15 and 19-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,958,769. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, the ‘769 patent claims an optical glass (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). The ‘769 patent further claims 3-18% of B2O3 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 5 wt % to 25 wt % of B2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 45-65% of La2O3 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 25 wt % to 45 wt % of La2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming greater than 0 to 10 wt % of Y2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 15 wt % of ZrO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 2 wt % to 15 wt % of Nb2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range); 5-20% of TiO2 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming greater than 0.5 wt % to 10 wt % of TiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘769 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 0 to 10 wt % of WO3 which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘769 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘769 patent claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1, claiming 0.5 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 9, the ‘769 patent claims wherein components thereof do not contain Ta2O5; and/or do not contain ZnO; and/or do not contain Rn2O; and/or do not contain Gd2O3; and/or do not contain Yb2O3; and/or do not contain GeO2 , and the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O (see the ‘769 patent at claim 1 claiming Ta2O5 is not comprised).
Regarding claim 10, the ‘769 patent claims a refractive index nd of the optical glass is above 1.97 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming a refractive index of the optical glass is > 1.87, which overlaps with the claimed range), and an Abbe number vd is 26-33 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming an abbe number thereof > 38, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 11, the ‘769 patent claims the refractive index nd of the optical glass is 1.99-2.10 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming a refractive index of the optical glass is > 1.87, which overlaps with the claimed range), and the Abbe number vd is 27-32 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming an abbe number thereof > 38, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 12, the ‘769 patent claims the refractive index nd of the optical glass is 1.995-2.02 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming a refractive index of the optical glass is > 1.87, which overlaps with the claimed range), and the Abbe number vd is 28-31 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming an abbe number thereof > 38, which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 13, the ‘769 patent claims a thermal expansion coefficient α20/120°C of the optical glass is below 90x10-7/K; and/or water resistance stability DW is above Class 2; and/or acid resistance stability DA is above Class 2; and/or weather resistance CR is above Class 2; and/or Knoop hardness HK is above 670x107 Pa; and/or Young's modulus E is above 11000x107Pa; and/or λ70 is below 450nm; and/or λ5 is below 390nm; and/or abrasion degree FA is 70-120; and/or bubble degree is above Grade A (see the ‘769 patent at claim 14, claiming a bubble content is above grade A).
Regarding claim 14, the ‘769 patent claims the thermal expansion coefficient α20/120°C of the optical glass is below 80x 10-7/K; and/or water resistance stability DW is Class 1; and/or acid resistance stability DA is Class 1; and/or weather resistance CR is Class 1; and/or Knoop hardness HK is above 690x107Pa;and/or Young's modulus E is above 12800x 107Pa; and/or λ70 is below 440nm; and/or λ5 is below 380nm; and/or abrasion degree FA is 85-105; and/or bubble degree is Grade A00 (see the ‘769 patent at claim 15, claiming the bubble content is above grade A00).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘769 patent claims a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘769 patent at claim 19).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘769 patent claims an optical element, made of the optical glass, or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘769 patent at claim 19).
Regarding claim 17, the ‘769 patent claims an optical instrument, comprising the optical glass, and/or the optical element made of the optical glass or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘769 patent at claim 20).
Claims 1-2, 7-9, and 13-17 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-2, 14 and 16-18 of copending Application No. 20240076227 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, the ‘227 application claims an optical glass (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming an optical glass), wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, comprising: 1-12% of SiO2 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). The ‘227 application further claims 3-18% of B2O3 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming 5 wt % to 20 wt % of B2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 45-65% of La2O3 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming 25 wt % to 50 wt % of La2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of Y2O3 (see the ‘227 application at claim 2, claiming greater than 0 to 8 wt % of Y2O3 which overlaps with the claimed range); 1-13% of ZrO2 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming 1 wt % to 12 wt % of ZrO2 which overlaps with the claimed range); 3-18% of Nb2O5 (see the ‘227 application at claim 2, claiming 0-12% of Nb2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range); 5-20% of TiO2 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming greater than 5 wt % to 20 wt % of TiO2 which is the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘227 application claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, further comprising: 0-8% of Ta2O5; and/or 0-8% of Gd2O3; and/or 0-8% RO; and/or 0-8% of Rn2O; and/or 0-6% of WO3; and/or 0-8% of ZnO; and/or 0-8% Al2O3; and/or 0-10% Yb2O3; and/or 0-5% of GeO2; and/or 0-1% of clarifying agent; the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘227 application at claim 2, claiming 0-5% of WO3 which overlaps with the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘227 application claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 2-10%; and/or B2O3 is 5-15%; and/or La2O3 is 47-60%; and/or Y2O3 is 2-12%; and/or ZrO2 is 2-10%; and/or Nb2O5 is 5-15%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-5%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-4%; and/or TiO2 is 8-18%; and/or RO is 0-4%; and/or Rn2O is 0-4%; and/or WO3 is 0-4%; and/or ZnO is 0-5%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-5%; and/or Yb2O3 is 0-5%; and/or GeO2 is 0-3%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.5%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming 1-15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘227 application claims wherein components thereof are represented by weight percentage, in which: SiO2 is 3-8%; and/or B2O3 is 6-12%; and/or La2O3 is 50-56%; and/or Y2O3 is 4-10%; and/or ZrO2 is 3-9%; and/or Nb2O5 is 6-12%; and/or Ta2O5 is 0-1%; and/or Gd2O3 is 0-2%; and/or TiO2 is 11-17%; and/or RO is 0-2%; and/or Rn2O is 0-2%; and/or WO3 is 0-3%; and/or ZnO is 0-1%; and/or Al2O3 is 0-2%, and/or Yb2O3 is 0-2%; and/or GeO2 is 0-1%; and/or clarifying agent is 0- 0.2%, the RO is one or more of MgO, CaO, SrO, and BaO, Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O, and the clarifying agent is one or more of Sb2O3, SnO, SnO2, and CeO2 (see the ‘227 application at claim 1, claiming 1-15 wt % of SiO2 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 9, the ‘227 application claims wherein components thereof do not contain Ta2O5; and/or do not contain ZnO; and/or do not contain Rn2O; and/or do not contain Gd2O3; and/or do not contain Yb2O3; and/or do not contain GeO2 , and the Rn2O is one or more of Li2O, Na2O, and K2O (see the ‘227 application at claim 2 claiming 0-5% of Ta2O5 which overlaps with the claimed range).
Regarding claim 13, the ‘227 application claims a thermal expansion coefficient α20/120°C of the optical glass is below 90x10-7/K; and/or water resistance stability DW is above Class 2; and/or acid resistance stability DA is above Class 2; and/or weather resistance CR is above Class 2; and/or Knoop hardness HK is above 670x107 Pa; and/or Young's modulus E is above 11000x107Pa; and/or λ70 is below 450nm; and/or λ5 is below 390nm; and/or abrasion degree FA is 70-120; and/or bubble degree is above Grade A (see the ‘227 application at claim 14, claiming a bubble content is above grade A).
Regarding claim 14, the ‘227 application claims the thermal expansion coefficient α20/120°C of the optical glass is below 80x 10-7/K; and/or water resistance stability DW is Class 1; and/or acid resistance stability DA is Class 1; and/or weather resistance CR is Class 1; and/or Knoop hardness HK is above 690x107Pa;and/or Young's modulus E is above 12800x 107Pa; and/or λ70 is below 440nm; and/or λ5 is below 380nm; and/or abrasion degree FA is 85-105; and/or bubble degree is Grade A00 (see the ‘227 application at claim 14, claiming λ5 is below 380 nm).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘227 application claims a glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘227 application at claim 16).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘227 application claims an optical element, made of the optical glass, or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘227 application at claim 17).
Regarding claim 17, the ‘227 application claims an optical instrument, comprising the optical glass, and/or the optical element made of the optical glass or made of the glass preform, made of the optical glass (see the ‘227 application at claim 18).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON K MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
CAMERON K MILLER
Examiner
Art Unit 1731
/CAMERON K MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1731