DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This application is a CON of App. No. PCT/JP22/10930, filed on 03/11/2022, which is entitled to and claims the benefit of JP Patent App. No. 2021-040751, filed 03/12/2021. The preliminary amendment filed on 09/11/2023 is entered and acknowledged by the Examiner.
3. Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-12, 15, without traverse in the reply filed on 10/01/2025 is acknowledged.
4. Claims 1-15 are pending. Claims 1-12, 15 are under examination on the merits. Claims 13-14 are withdrawn to a non-elected invention from further consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The information disclosure statements submitted on 09/11/2023, 12/27/2023, 08/13/ 2024, and 08/06/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner has considered the information disclosure statements.
Drawings
6. The drawings are received on 09/11/2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Priority
7. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted on 10/26/2023 under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
9. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “representing a reflectance [%] of a perfectly diffusely reflecting surface”, wherein applicant fails to articulate by sufficiently distinct functional language, applicant regards as those which will facilitate “perfectly diffusely reflecting surface” requisite to identifying reflectance % defined to be 100% at each wavelength or matter claimed, thus claim 1 constitutes indefinite subject matter as per the metes and bounds of said phrase engenders indeterminacy in scope and the language of the claim is such that a person of ordinary skill in the art could not interpret the metes and bounds of the claim from the application disclosure. Claims 2-12, 15 being depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
10. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the term “(defined to be 100% at each wavelength)”, wherein, the inclusion of a term within parentheses renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the included term is part of the claimed invention. Claims 2-12, 15 being depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
11. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “can be obtained by appropriate numerical integration, and wavelength intervals for numerical integration”, wherein applicant fails to articulate by sufficiently distinct functional language, applicant regards as those which will facilitate “appropriate numerical integration, and wavelength intervals for numerical integration” requisite to identifying stimulus values or matter claimed, thus claim 1 constitutes indefinite subject matter as per the metes and bounds of said phrase engenders indeterminacy in scope. Claims 2-12, 15 being depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
12. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 2-12, 15 being depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
13. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “the formula (9)”, wherein applicant fails to articulate by sufficiently distinct functional language, the definition of k, thus claim 1 constitutes indefinite subject matter as per the metes and bounds of said phrase engenders indeterminacy in scope. Claims 2-12, 15 being depended on claim 1 are rejected as well.
14. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 8 recites “selected from a group consisting of compounds having a structure of any of a porphyrin structure, merocyanine structure, …. pyrromethene structure, and indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof.”, wherein the improper phrasing of the Markush group renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which members of the group are part of the claimed invention. Markush groups must be stated in the alternative, of which one acceptable form is “…selected from the group consisting of A, B and C.” See MPEP § 2173.05(h).
Double Patenting
15. 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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An erequest that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
16. A) Claims 1-12, 15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of copending Application No.18/222,081 (US Pub. No. 2023/0357603 A1, hereinafter “’603”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the ‘603 recites an adhesive sheet comprising a first adhesive layer containing an adhesive and a dye, and an ultraviolet absorbing layer laminated on one surface side of the first adhesive layer, wherein the dye contains a first coloring material having a maximum absorption wavelength in the range of 470 to 530 nm and a half width of the absorption spectrum of 15 to 45 nm, and a second coloring material having a maximum absorption wavelength in the range of 560 to 620 nm and a half width of the absorption spectrum of 15 to 55 nm, and the ultraviolet absorbing layer has an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925, wherein the first adhesive layer contains at least one of a radical scavenger, a peroxide decomposer and a singlet oxygen quencher, wherein the radical scavenger is a hindered amine light stabilizer having a molecular weight of 2000 or more, and wherein the singlet oxygen quencher is a transition metal complex of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate or benzenethiol or similar dithiol. ‘603 teaches the first adhesive layer further contains, as the dye, a third coloring material having a maximum absorption wavelength within the range of 650 to 800 nm, wherein the dye contained in the first adhesive layer contains one or more compounds selected from the group consisting of compounds having any of a porphyrin structure, a merocyanine structure, a phthalocyanine structure, an azo structure, a cyanine structure, a squarylium structure, a coumarin structure, a polyene structure, a quinone structure, a tetraazaporphyrin structure, a pyrromethene structure and an indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof, wherein the ultraviolet absorbing layer is a second adhesive layer containing an adhesive and an ultraviolet absorber, wherein the ultraviolet absorbing layer is a transparent substrate. ‘603 teaches the adhesive sheet, further comprising an oxygen barrier layer having an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/(m2*day*atm) or less on the ultraviolet absorbing layer side of the first adhesive layer, and further comprising an antireflection layer including a high refractive index layer and a low refractive index layer, or an antiglare layer, as an optical functional layer for reducing reflection of incident external light, on the upper layer of the ultraviolet absorbing layer, and an antistatic layer or an antifouling layer, and a display device comprising the adhesive sheet.
Given that the adhesive sheer as presently read on the adhesive sheet disclosed in ‘603 claims, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the scope of recited claims encompasses the scope of ‘603claims and thus, render the present claims prima facie obvious.
This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
B) Claims 1-12, 15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of copending Application No.18/354,563 (US Pub. No. 2023/0358931 A1, hereinafter “’931”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the ‘931 recites an optical sheet, comprising: a first adhesive layer containing an adhesive and a colorant, the first adhesive layer having a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface; and an ultraviolet shielding layer arranged to face the first surface of the first adhesive layer, wherein the colorant contains at least one of a first coloring material having a maximum absorption wavelength in a range of 470 to 530 nm and an absorption spectral half width of 15 to 45 nm, a second coloring material having a maximum absorption wavelength in a range of 560 to 620 nm and an absorption spectral half width of 15 to 55 nm, and a third coloring material in which a wavelength having the lowest transmittance in a wavelength range of 400 to 800 nm is in a range of 650 to 800 nm, in the first adhesive layer, one of absorption wavelength bands of the colorant includes a maximum absorption wavelength at which a transmittance is 1% or more and less than 50%, the ultraviolet shielding layer has an ultraviolet shielding rate according to JIS L 1925 of 85% or more, and ΔE * ab, which is a chromaticity difference between before and after a light resistance test of irradiating for 120 hours with a xenon lamp having an illuminance at wavelengths of 300 to 400 nm of 60 W/cm2 at a temperature of 45° C. and a humidity of 50% RH, satisfies Equation (1) below: ΔE * ab≤5.’ 931 teaches the optical sheet, further comprising an oxygen barrier layer having an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/(m2.day.atm) or less, the oxygen barrier layer being arranged to face the first surface of the first adhesive layer, as a layer above the ultraviolet shielding layer, an optical function layer that reduces reflection of incident external light, wherein the optical function layer includes at least one of an anti-reflection layer that contains a high refractive index layer and a low refractive index layer, an anti-reflection layer that contains a high refractive index layer and an anti-glare layer, an anti-reflection layer that contains a high refractive index layer, an anti-glare layer, and a low refractive index layer, and an anti-reflection layer that contains an anti-glare layer. ‘931 teaches the optical sheet of, further comprising an anti-static layer or an anti-fouling layer, and a display device comprising the adhesive sheet.
Given that the adhesive sheer as presently read on the adhesive sheet disclosed in ‘931 claims, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the scope of recited claims encompasses the scope of ‘931 claims and thus, render the present claims prima facie obvious.
This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
17. 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.
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.
18. Claims 1-10, 12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ishimaru et al. (EP 4283346 A1, hereinafter “’346”).
Regarding claim 1: ‘346 discloses an adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), comprising a colored adhesive layer formed of one or more layers comprising a first colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less, a second colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less, and a third colorant in which, in a wavelength range of 400 nm or more and 780 nm or less, a wavelength with a lowest transmittance is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Page 2, [0013]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 27, Claim 1), and a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 2, [0013]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 27, Claim 1). ‘346 is silent regarding color hues a* and b* defined by the Formulas (1) to (9) as set forth are each in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less.
However, pertaining claim 1, since ‘346 discloses the identical or substantially identical adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), comprising a colored adhesive layer formed of one or more layers comprising a first colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less, a second colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less, and a third colorant in which, in a wavelength range of 400 nm or more and 780 nm or less, a wavelength with a lowest transmittance is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Page 2, [0013]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 27, Claim 1), and a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 2, [0013]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 27, Claim 1) as the recited claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have expected that the claimed effects and physical properties, i.e., color hues , would inherently/implicitly be achieved by ‘346 (i.e., color hues a* and b* defined by the Formulas (1) to (9) as set forth are each in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less). If there is any difference between the product of ‘346 and the product of the instant claims the difference would have been minor and obvious. “Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01(I). Absent an objective showing to the contrary, the addition of the claimed physical properties to the claim language fails to provide patentable distinction over the prior art.
Regarding claim 2: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the colored adhesive layer does not comprise a dye having a main absorption wavelength band in a wavelength range of 390 nm to 435 nm (Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 27, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 3: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the UV absorbing layer is an adhesive layer comprising a UV absorber (Page 2, [0013]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 27, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 4: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the UV absorbing layer is an adhesive layer comprising a UV absorber, wherein the UV absorbing layer is a transparent substrate having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 2, [0013]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 28, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 5: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises at least one or more of radical a radical scavenger, peroxide decomposer, and singlet oxygen quencher (Page 2, [0013]; Page 4, [0032]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 28, Claim 2).
Regarding claim 6: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a radical scavenger; and the radical scavenger contains a hindered amine light stabilizer with a molecular weight of 2,000 or more (Page 4, [0034]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Example; Page 28, Claim 3).
Regarding claim 7: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a singlet oxygen quencher; and the singlet oxygen quencher contains any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof (Page 4, [0035]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Example; Page 28, Claim 4).
Regarding claim 8: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), wherein the first colorant, the second colorant, and the third colorant contained in the colored adhesive layer contain one or more compounds selected from a group consisting of compounds having a structure of any of a porphyrin structure, merocyanine structure, phthalocyanine structure, azo structure, cyanine structure, squarylium structure, coumarin structure, polyene structure, quinone structure, tetraazaporphyrin structure, pyrromethene structure, indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof (Page 4, [0029]; Page 14, [0098]; Page 16, Examples; Page 27, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 9: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 2, [0013]), further comprising an oxygen barrier layer provided closer to the UV absorbing layer than the colored adhesive layer (Page 9, [0086, Fig. 5), the oxygen barrier layer having an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/m2:day-atm or less (Page 9, [0087]; Page 28, Claim 5).
Regarding claim 10: ‘346 discloses an optical sheet (Page 9, [0081]; Fig. 4), comprising the adhesive sheet, and an optical function layer which is disposed on an external light-incident side with respect to the UV absorbing layer and reduces reflection of the external light, wherein the optical function layer is either an antiglare layer, or an antireflection layer including a high refractive index layer or a low refractive index layer (Page 9, [0082]; Fig. 4; Page 10, [0094]; Page 28, Claims 7-8).
Regarding claim 12: ‘346 discloses a display device (Page 2, [0001]), comprising a luminescent layer; and the adhesive sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 4, [0028]; Page 10, [0096]; Page 13, Table; Page 29, Claim 12).
Regarding claim 15: ‘346 discloses a display device (Page 2, [0001]), comprising a luminescent layer; and the optical sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 4, [0028]; Page 10, [0096]; Page 13, Table; Page 29, Claim 12).
19. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yokoyama et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0357603 A1, hereinafter “’603”).
Regarding claim 1: ‘603 discloses an adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), comprising a colored adhesive layer formed of one or more layers comprising a first colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Page 11, [0172]), a second colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Page 11, [0173]), and a third colorant in which, in a wavelength range of 400 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Page 11, [0176]), a wavelength with a lowest transmittance is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less; and a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 1, [0010]; Page 11, [0171]-[0175]; Page 12, Table 5B; Page 14, Claims 1 & 5). ‘603 is silent regarding color hues a* and b* defined by the Formulas (1) to (9) as set forth are each in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less.
However, pertaining claim 1, since ‘603 discloses the identical or substantially identical adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), comprising a colored adhesive layer formed of one or more layers comprising a first colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Page 11, [0172]), a second colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Page 11, [0173]), and a third colorant in which, in a wavelength range of 400 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Page 11, [0176]), a wavelength with a lowest transmittance is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less; and a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 1, [0010]; Page 11, [0171]-[0175]; Page 12, Table 5B; Page 14, Claim 1) as the recited claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have expected that the claimed effects and physical properties, i.e., color hues , would inherently/implicitly be achieved by ‘603 (i.e., color hues a* and b* defined by the Formulas (1) to (9) as set forth are each in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less). If there is any difference between the product of ‘603 and the product of the instant claims the difference would have been minor and obvious. “Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01(I). Absent an objective showing to the contrary, the addition of the claimed physical properties to the claim language fails to provide patentable distinction over the prior art.
Regarding claim 2: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the colored adhesive layer does not comprise a dye having a main absorption wavelength band in a wavelength range of 390 nm to 435 nm Page 11, [0171]-[0175]; Page 12, Table 5B; Page 14, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 3: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the UV absorbing layer is an adhesive layer comprising a UV absorber (Page 11, [0181]-[0183]; Page 12, Table 5B; Page 14, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 4: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the UV absorbing layer is an adhesive layer comprising a UV absorber, wherein the UV absorbing layer is a transparent substrate having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 14, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 5: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises at least one or more of radical a radical scavenger, peroxide decomposer, and singlet oxygen quencher (Page 7, [0081]; Page 14, Claim 2)
Regarding claim 6: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a radical scavenger; and the radical scavenger contains a hindered amine light stabilizer with a molecular weight of 2,000 or more (Page 7, [0081]; Page 14, Claim 3).
Regarding claim 7: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a singlet oxygen quencher; and the singlet oxygen quencher contains any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof (Page 7, [0083]; Page 14, Claim 4).
Regarding claim 8: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), wherein the first colorant, the second colorant, and the third colorant contained in the colored adhesive layer contain one or more compounds selected from a group consisting of compounds having a structure of any of a porphyrin structure, merocyanine structure, phthalocyanine structure, azo structure, cyanine structure, squarylium structure, coumarin structure, polyene structure, quinone structure, tetraazaporphyrin structure, pyrromethene structure, indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof (Page 4, [0038]; Page 14, Claim 5).
Regarding claim 9: ‘603 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0002]), further comprising an oxygen barrier layer provided closer to the UV absorbing layer than the colored adhesive layer, the oxygen barrier layer having an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/m2:day-atm or less (Page 7, [0077]; Page 14, Claim 9).
Regarding claim 10: ‘603 discloses an optical sheet (Page 3, [0032]; Fig. 6), comprising the adhesive sheet, and an optical function layer which is disposed on an external light-incident side with respect to the UV absorbing layer and reduces reflection of the external light, wherein the optical function layer is either an antiglare layer, or an antireflection layer including a high refractive index layer or a low refractive index layer (Page 3, [0032]; Fig. 6; Page 14, Claim 10).
Regarding claim 11: ‘603 discloses the optical sheet (Page 3, [0032]; Fig. 6), further comprising an antistatic layer or an antifouling layer (Page 8, [0090]; Page 14, Claim 11).
Regarding claim 12: ‘603 discloses a display device (Page 1, [0002]), comprising a luminescent layer; and the adhesive sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 8, [0087]; Page 14, Claim 12).
Regarding claim 15: ‘603 discloses a display device (Page 1, [0002]), comprising a luminescent layer; and the optical sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 8, [0088]; Page 14, Claim 12).
20. Claims 1-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ishimaru et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0358931 A1, hereinafter “’931”).
Regarding claim 1: ‘931 discloses an adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), comprising a colored adhesive layer formed of one or more layers comprising a first colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Page 1, [0017]), a second colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Page 1, [0018]), and a third colorant in which, in a wavelength range of 400 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Page 1, [0019]), a wavelength with a lowest transmittance is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less; and a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 1, [0021]; Page 11, [0190]-[0198]; Page 14, Claim 1). ‘603 is silent regarding color hues a* and b* defined by the Formulas (1) to (9) as set forth are each in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less.
However, pertaining claim 1, since ‘931 discloses the identical or substantially identical adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), comprising a colored adhesive layer formed of one or more layers comprising a first colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Page 1, [0017]), a second colorant in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half width of absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Page 1, [0018]), and a third colorant in which, in a wavelength range of 400 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Page 1, [0019]), a wavelength with a lowest transmittance is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less; and a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 1, [0021]; Page 11, [0190]-[0198]; Page 14, Claim 1) as the recited claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have expected that the claimed effects and physical properties, i.e., color hues , would inherently/implicitly be achieved by ‘931 (i.e., color hues a* and b* defined by the Formulas (1) to (9) as set forth are each in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less). If there is any difference between the product of ‘931 and the product of the instant claims the difference would have been minor and obvious. “Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01(I). Absent an objective showing to the contrary, the addition of the claimed physical properties to the claim language fails to provide patentable distinction over the prior art
Regarding claim 2: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the colored adhesive layer does not comprise a dye having a main absorption wavelength band in a wavelength range of 390 nm to 435 nm (Page 1, [0015]-[0021]; Page 11, [0190]-[0198]; Page 14, Claim 1). .
Regarding claim 3: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the UV absorbing layer is an adhesive layer comprising a UV absorber (Page 11, [0203]-[0205]; Page 15, Claim 6).
Regarding claim 4: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the UV absorbing layer is an adhesive layer comprising a UV absorber, wherein the UV absorbing layer is a transparent substrate having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Page 1, [0021]; Page 14, Claim 1).
Regarding claim 5: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises at least one or more of radical a radical scavenger, peroxide decomposer, and singlet oxygen quencher (Page 2, [0048; Page 3, [0052]; Page 14, Claim 2)
Regarding claim 6: ‘346 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a radical scavenger; and the radical scavenger contains a hindered amine light stabilizer with a molecular weight of 2,000 or more (Page 3, [0053]; Page 14, Claim 3).
Regarding claim 7: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a singlet oxygen quencher; and the singlet oxygen quencher contains any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof (Page 3, [0054]; Page 14, Claim 4).
Regarding claim 8: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), wherein the first colorant, the second colorant, and the third colorant contained in the colored adhesive layer contain one or more compounds selected from a group consisting of compounds having a structure of any of a porphyrin structure, merocyanine structure, phthalocyanine structure, azo structure, cyanine structure, squarylium structure, coumarin structure, polyene structure, quinone structure, tetraazaporphyrin structure, pyrromethene structure, indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof (Page 2, [0047]; Page 14, Claim 5).
Regarding claim 9: ‘931 discloses the adhesive sheet (Page 1, [0014]), further comprising an oxygen barrier layer provided closer to the UV absorbing layer than the colored adhesive layer, the oxygen barrier layer having an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/m2:day-atm or less (Page 5, [0089]; Page 15, Claim 8).
Regarding claim 10: ‘931 discloses an optical sheet (Page 1, [0002]), comprising the adhesive sheet, and an optical function layer which is disposed on an external light-incident side with respect to the UV absorbing layer and reduces reflection of the external light, wherein the optical function layer is either an antiglare layer, or an antireflection layer including a high refractive index layer or a low refractive index layer (Page 5, [0094]; Page 7, [0116]; Page 8, [0128]; Page 15, Claim 9).
Regarding claim 11: ‘931 discloses the optical sheet (Page 1, [0002]), further comprising an antistatic layer or an antifouling layer (Page 6, [0110]; Page 15, Claim 10).
Regarding claim 12: ‘931 discloses a display device (Page 1, [0002]), comprising a luminescent layer; and the adhesive sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 1, [0023]; Page 15, Claim 12).
Regarding claim 15: ‘931 discloses a display device (Page 1, [0002]), comprising a luminescent layer; and the optical sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 1, [0023]; Page 15, Claim 12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
21. 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.
22. Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chul Jeong (KR20190109988 A, hereinafter “’988”) in view of Yoshiharu Yabuki (JP 2001-147319 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’319”).
Regarding claim 1: ‘988 teaches an antireflection film and an optical member (i.e., adhesive sheet, Page 2/14, lines 7-8) having an adhesive film (i.e., colored adhesive layer) laminated on a lower surface of the antireflection film and a quantum dot-containing sheet laminated on a lower surface of the optical member (Page 2/14, lines 25-28). ‘988 teaches the adhesive film comprises pyrromethene-based dye with maximum absorption wavelength 493 nm, FDB-007 (Yamada Chemical) as first colorant, tetraazaporphyrin-based dye with maximum absorption wavelength 594 nm, FDG-007 (Yamada chemical) as second colorant, and phthalocyanine-based dyes with maximum absorption wavelength 754 nm, FDN-001 (Yamada chemical) as third colorant (Page 9/14, lines 36-41) with color hues a* and b* are each 2 or less (Page 9/14, lines 1-3). ‘988 does not expressly teach a UV absorbing layer disposed on one surface of the colored adhesive layer and having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925.
However, ‘319 teaches a color correction filter in which a filter layer and a UV-absorbing layer are laminated in order to solve the problem of improving the stability of a dye when subjected to ultraviolet light (Pages 18-19/94, [0028]-[0029], Fig. 1). ‘319 teaches that the absorbance of ultraviolet light at 360 nm is preferably 1.0 or greater (transmittance is 10% or less), and is more preferably 1.5 or greater (transmittance is 3% or less) (Page 60/94, [0136]).
In an analogous art of adhesive sheet for display device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the UV-absorbing layer as taught by ‘319 to the optical member by ‘988, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to improve the stability of dyes when subjected to ultraviolet light as suggested by ‘319 (Pages 18-19/94, [0028]-[0029], Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2: ‘988 teaches the adhesive sheet (Page 2/14, lines 7-8), wherein the colored adhesive layer does not comprise a dye having a main absorption wavelength band in a wavelength range of 390 nm to 435 nm (Page 9/14, lines 36-41).
Regarding claim 3: ‘988 teaches an antireflection film and an optical member (i.e., adhesive sheet, Page 2/14, lines 7-8) having an adhesive film (i.e., colored adhesive layer) laminated on a lower surface of the antireflection film and a quantum dot-containing sheet laminated on a lower surface of the optical member (Page 2/14, lines 25-28). ‘988 teaches the adhesive film comprises pyrromethene-based dye with maximum absorption wavelength 493 nm, FDB-007 (Yamada Chemical) as first colorant, tetraazaporphyrin-based dye with maximum absorption wavelength 594 nm, FDG-007 (Yamada chemical) as second colorant, and phthalocyanine-based dyes with maximum absorption wavelength 754 nm, FDN-001 (Yamada chemical) as third colorant (Page 9/14, lines 36-41) with color hues a* and b* are each 2 or less (Page 9/14, lines 1-3).
‘319 teaches a color correction filter in which a filter layer and a UV-absorbing layer are laminated in order to solve the problem of improving the stability of a dye when subjected to ultraviolet light (Pages 18-19/94, [0028]-[0029], Fig. 1). ‘319 teaches that the absorbance of ultraviolet light at 360 nm is preferably 1.0 or greater (transmittance is 10% or less), and is more preferably 1.5 or greater (transmittance is 3% or less) (Page 60/94, [0136]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since making the UV-absorbing layer an adhesive layer is a design matter that could be addressed as appropriate by a person skilled in the art.
Regarding claim 4: The disclosure of ’988 in view of ‘319 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘319 teaches the UV absorbing layer is a transparent substrate having a UV shielding rate of 85% or more according to JIS L 1925 (Pages 18-19/94, [0028]-[0029], Fig. 1).
Accordingly, a person skilled in the art could easily apply, to the "antireflective film" by ‘988, the feature disclosed by ‘319 a UV absorber being contained in a transparent
support, thereby arriving at a configuration like that of the limiting matter of the invention as in instant claim.
Regarding claim 5: The disclosure of ’988 in view of ‘319 is adequately set forth in paragraph above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘319 teaches the colored adhesive layer comprises at least one or more of radical a radical scavenger, peroxide decomposer, and singlet oxygen quencher (Page 75/94, [0191]-[0192]).
Accordingly, a person skilled in the art could easily apply the singlet oxygen quencher disclosed by ‘319 to the "adhesive film" of ‘988. Additionally, using, as the fading inhibitor, a radical scavenger or a peroxide decomposer in place of or in addition to the abovementioned singlet oxygen quencher is a design matter that could be addressed, as appropriate, by a person skilled in the art.
Regarding claim 7: The disclosure of ’988 in view of ‘391 is adequately set forth in paragraph 16 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘391 teaches the colored adhesive layer comprises a singlet oxygen quencher; and the singlet oxygen quencher contains any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof such as nickel complexes (Page 75/94, [0192]). It is submitted that using dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate, or benzenedithiol as the abovementioned singlet oxygen quencher is merely a selection of the optimal material out of publicly known materials and is not
significant.
Regarding claim 8: ‘988 teaches the adhesive film comprises pyrromethene-based dye with maximum absorption wavelength 493 nm, FDB-007 (Yamada Chemical) as first colorant, tetraazaporphyrin-based dye with maximum absorption wavelength 594 nm, FDG-007 (Yamada chemical) as second colorant, and phthalocyanine-based dyes with maximum absorption wavelength 754 nm, FDN-001 (Yamada chemical) as third colorant (Page 9/14, lines 36-41).
Regarding claims 10-11: ‘988 teaches an optical sheet, comprising the adhesive sheet, and an optical function layer which is disposed on an external light-incident side with respect to the UV absorbing layer and reduces reflection of the external light (Page 3/14, lines 12-17), wherein the optical function layer is either an antiglare layer, or an antireflection layer including a high refractive index layer or a low refractive index layer (Page 3/14, lines 47-48), and the optical sheet, further comprising an antistatic layer or an antifouling layer (Page 3/14, lines 44-46). Accordingly, on the basis of said suggestion, a person skilled in the art could easily configure the invention disclosed by ‘988 so as to be provided with an antireflective layer, an antiglare layer, an antifouling layer or an antistatic layer, thereby arriving at a configuration like that of the limiting matter of as in instant claims.
Regarding claim 12: ‘988 teaches a display device, comprising a luminescent layer, and the adhesive sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 2/14, lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 15: ‘988 teaches a display device, comprising a luminescent layer, and the optical sheet, the adhesive sheet or the optical sheet being disposed to face a light emission surface of the luminescent layer from above in a traveling direction of light emitted from the luminescent layer (Page 2/14, lines 7-8).
23. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chul Jeong (KR20190109988 A, hereinafter “’988”) in view of Yoshiharu Yabuki (JP 2001-147319 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’319”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Miyata et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0217999 A1, hereinafter “’999”).
Regarding claim 6: The disclosure of ’988 in view of ‘319 is adequately set forth in paragraph 22 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘391 teaches the colored adhesive layer comprises a singlet oxygen quencher; and the singlet oxygen quencher contains any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyldithiocarbamate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof such as nickel complexes (Page 75/94, [0192]). ’988 in view of ‘319 does not expressly teach the adhesive sheet, wherein the colored adhesive layer comprises a radical scavenger; and the radical scavenger contains a hindered amine light stabilizer with a molecular weight of 2,000 or more.
However, ‘999 teaches a resin composition includes a near infrared absorbing colorant, an antioxidant, and a resin, in which a content of the near infrared absorbing colorant is 5 mass % or higher with respect to a total solid content of the resin composition, and the antioxidant includes a hindered amine compound (Page 1, [0011]-[0016]). ‘999 teaches the resin composition comprises an antioxidant, wherein the antioxidant used in the resin composition includes a hindered amine compound (Page 3, [0090]), and wherein the weight-average molecular weight of the polymer type hindered amine compound is preferably 1500 or higher, more preferably 2000 or higher, and still more preferably 3000 or higher. The upper limit is preferably 100000 or lower, more preferably 50000 or lower, still more preferably 30000 or lower, still more preferably 25000 or lower, still more preferably 20000 or lower, still more preferably 10000 or lower, and most preferably 5000 or lower. In a case where the weight-average molecular weight of the polymer type hindered amine compound is in the above-described range, desorption of the antioxidant from the film caused by heating during film formation can be effectively suppressed. Further, compatibility with a resin or the like other than the antioxidant used in the resin composition is excellent (Page 7, [0115]).
In an analogous art of adhesive sheet for display device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art modify the adhesive sheet by ‘988, so as to include the colored adhesive layer comprises a radical scavenger; and the radical scavenger contains a hindered amine light stabilizer with a molecular weight of 2,000 or more as taught by ‘999, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to avoid desorption of the antioxidant from the film caused by heating during film formation can be effectively suppressed. Further, compatibility with a resin or the like other than the antioxidant used in the resin composition is excellent as suggested by ‘999 (Page 7, [0115]).
24. Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chul Jeong (KR20190109988 A, hereinafter “’988”) in view of Yoshiharu Yabuki (JP 2001-147319 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’319”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view