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 .
Response to Amendment/Arguments
This office action is in response to applicant’s reply filed 4/22/26. Amended Claims 1-20 are pending.
Regarding the previous drawing objections, applicant’s amended drawings include the claimed subject matter of Claims 11, 12, 15, and 18 so these objections are overcome. Regarding the drawing objection for labels, Fig. 5 now has labeled representations so this objection is overcome. Regarding the previous drawing objection for hatching, applicant argues (begin excerpt/):
PNG
media_image1.png
982
671
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(/end excerpt)
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. MPEP 608.02 V and IX address hatching of sectioned parts. Applicant’s Figs. 1-4 do not follow these sections as the hatchings of the sectioned parts do not match the described and claimed invention. The depicted materials are not conventionally depicted, as shown in MPEP 608.02 IX and described by MPEP 608.02 V quoting 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3). As one example, in Figs. 1-4 inner pane 2 and outer pane 1 are shown as metal.
Regarding the previous prior art rejection by Thiel, applicant’s argument (p. 14-15) regarding the lack of disclosed ratios between parts is considered persuasive and the rejection is overcome. Please see the following action for treatment of the claims.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The depicted materials in Figs. 1-4 are not in agreement with the described and claimed invention (MPEP 608.02 V and IX).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Examiner notes on claim interpretation:
Applicant has provided special definitions (MPEP 2173.01, 2173.05(a) III, and 2111.01 IV):
In the context of the invention, "inner pane" refers to the pane of the composite pane facing the interior (in particular, the vehicle interior). (p. 5)
"Outer pane" refers to the pane facing the external surroundings. (p. 5)
The term "upper edge" refers to that edge which is intended, in the installed
position, to point upward. (p. 5)
The term "lower edge" refers to that edge which is intended, in the installed position, to point downward. (p. 5)
In the case of a windshield, the upper edge is often also referred to as the "roof edge" and the lower edge as the "engine edge". (p. 5)
In the context of the invention, "exterior-side surface" refers to that primary surface intended to face the external surroundings in the installed position. (p. 5)
In the context of the invention, "interior- side surface" refers to that primary surface intended to face the interior in the installed position. (p. 5)
Considered as a "transparent coating" is a coating that has an average transmittance in the visible spectral range of at least 70%, preferably at least 72.5%, i.e., does not significantly restrict vision through the pane. (p. 6)
The term "a dielectric module" thus means dielectric layer which can be formed from a single ply, i.e., a single dielectric layer, or from multiple plies of dielectric layers. (p.6)
In this context, the term "silver layer" designates a layer formed on the basis of silver. (p. 7)
The term “total transmittance” is based on the process for testing the light permeability of motor vehicle windows specified by ECE-R 43, Annex 3, § 9.1. (p. 13)
TTS value refers to the total solar energy transmitted, measured in accordance with ISO 13837 - it is a measure of thermal comfort. (p. 13)
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-11, 14-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fischer et al. (WO 2019206493, previously cited on applicant’s IDS, a machine translation accompanying this office action).
Regarding Claim 1,
A composite pane, comprising an outer pane (outer pane 1) having an exterior-side surface (I) and an interior-side surface (II), an inner pane (2) having an exterior- side surface (III) and an interior-side surface (IV), and a thermoplastic intermediate layer (3: “The composite pane 10 is constructed from an outer pane 1 and an inner pane 2, which are connected to one another via a thermoplastic intermediate layer 3”), which joins the interior-side surface of the outer pane to the exterior-side surface of the inner pane, wherein the composite pane has at least one sun shading coating (20) between the outer pane and the inner pane, wherein
the sun shading coating comprises, starting from the inner pane toward the outer pane, a layer sequence
-first dielectric module (Example 1 (“Beispiel 1”): 22.1 and/or 24.1 and/or 25.2 and/or 22a.2 and/or 22b.2 and/or 23.2 and/or 24.2)
-first silver layer (Example 1: 21.2)
second dielectric module (Example 1: 25.3 and/or 22a.3 and/or 22b.3 and/or 23.3 and/or 24.3)
-second silver layer (Example 1: 21.3),
-third dielectric module (Example 1: 25.4 and/or 22a.4 and/or 22b.4 and/or 23.4 and/or 24.4),
-third silver layer (Example 1: 21.4),
-fourth dielectric module (Example 1: 25.5 and/or 22.5),
wherein the first, second and third silver layers have, relative to one another, a geometrical layer thickness of Ag2>Ag1>Ag3, where Ag1 is the geometrical layer thickness of the first silver layer, Ag2 is the geometrical layer thickness of the second silver layer, and Ag3 is the geometrical layer thickness of the third silver layer, and the first, second and third silver layers of the sun shading coating have a relative geometrical layer thickness of 1.0<Ag1/Ag3 and 1.2<Ag2/Ag3<2.
PNG
media_image2.png
339
658
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
669
569
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
934
858
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner note: Examiner notes that Example 2 is also applicable to the current claim language.
Regarding Claim 2,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the first (Example 1: ex. 25.2 and 22a.2 and 22b.2 and 23.2 and 24.2) , second (Example 1: ex. 24.3 and 23.3 and 22b.3 and 22a.3), third (Example 1: ex. 24.4 and 23.4 and 22b.4 and 22a.4 and 25.4) and fourth (Example 1: ex. 25.5 and 22.5) dielectric modules have a relative optical layer thickness of M2/M1>1.9, M2/M3>0.8, and M2/M4>2, where M1 is the optical layer thickness of the first dielectric module, M2 is the optical layer thickness of the second dielectric module, M3 is the optical layer thickness of the third dielectric module and M4 is the optical layer thickness of the fourth dielectric module.
Examiner note: Examiner notes that other interpretations are also applicable to the current claim language.
Regarding Claim 3,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the first dielectric module, the second dielectric module, the third dielectric module, and/or the fourth dielectric module have at least one dielectric layer based on silicon nitride (Example 1: at least one of 22.1 and/or 22a.2 and/or 22a.3 and/or 22a.4).
Regarding Claim 4,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the first dielectric module, the second dielectric module, the third dielectric module, and/or the fourth dielectric module include at least one first dielectric layer based on silicon nitride (Example 1: at least one of 22.1 and/or 22a.2 and/or 22a.3 and/or 22a.4) and at least one second dielectric layer based on zinc oxide (Example 1: at least one of 24.1 and/or 25.2 and/or 24.2 and/or 25.3 and/or 24.3 and/or 25.4 and/or 24.4 and/or 25.5).
Regarding Claim 5,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the first dielectric module, the second dielectric module, the third dielectric module, and/or the fourth dielectric module include at least one first dielectric layer based on silicon nitride (Example 1: at least one of 22.1 and/or 22a.2 and/or 22a.3 and/or 22a.4), at least one second dielectric layer based on zinc oxide (Example 1: at least one of 24.1 and/or 25.2 and/or 24.2 and/or 25.3 and/or 24.3 and/or 25.4 and/or 24.4 and/or 25.5), and at least one third dielectric layer based on a mixed tin-zinc oxide (Example 1: at least one of 23.2 and/or 23.3 and/or 23.4).
Regarding Claim 6,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the sun shading coating includes, above and/or below the first, second and third silver layers, in each case at least one metallic blocking layer (Example 1: at least one of 26.2 and/or 26.3 and/or 26.4), which has a geometrical thickness of less than 1 nm.
Regarding Claim 7,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the first silver layer, the second silver layer, and the third silver layer have, in each case, a geometrical thickness of 5 nm to 25 nm (Example 1: 15.6nm, 18.3nm, 12.5nm).
Regarding Claim 9,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the first dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 25.2 and 22a.2 and 22b.2 and 23.2 and 24.2), the second dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 25.3 and 22a.3 and 22b.3 and 23.3 and 24.3), the third dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 24.4 and 22a.4 and 22b.4 and 23.4 and 24.4), and the fourth dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 25.5 and 22.5) have, in each case, a geometrical thickness of 10 nm to 100 nm.
Examiner note: Examiner notes that other interpretations are also applicable to the current claim language.
Regarding Claim 10,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the sun shading coating is applied on the exterior-side surface of the inner pane (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 11,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the sun shading coating has at least two bus bars via which the sun shading coating is connectable to an electrical voltage source (ex. “When the electrically conductive coating is provided as a heatable coating, it is typically provided with busbars connected to connecting cables which extend beyond the side edge of the composite disk. By means of the connecting cables, the busbars can be connected to an external voltage source. The bus bars are arranged in the edge region along two opposite side edges along a large part of the entire coating width and conduct the electric current as homogeneously as possible into the conductive coating. The bus bars are typically formed as strips of a conductive foil (eg, copper foil) and placed on or over the coating, or printed as a conductive paste (typically containing silver particles and glass frit) on the coating or on the pane under the coating.”).
Regarding Claim 14,
A method for producing a composite pane according to claim 1 comprising:
a) applying a sun shading coating (20, ex. Fig. 1) to the interior-side surface of the outer pane, or to the exterior-side surface of the inner pane, or introducing the sun shading coating into a thermoplastic intermediate layer,
b) producing a layer stack comprising at least, in this order, the outer pane (1), the thermoplastic intermediate layer (3), and the inner pane (2), and
c) joining the layer stack comprising at least the outer pane, the thermoplastic intermediate layer, and the inner pane to form the composite pane (ex. “The composite pane 10 is constructed from an outer pane 1 and an inner pane 2, which are connected to one another via a thermoplastic intermediate layer 3.”).
Regarding Claim 15,
A method comprising providing a composite pane according to claim 1 in a motor vehicle as a windshield (ex. “Fig. 1 shows an embodiment of a composite disc 10 according to the invention, which is provided as a windshield of a passenger car.”), rear window, side window, and/or roof panel.
Regarding Claim 16,
The composite pane according to claim 9, wherein (Example 1: ex. 25.2 and 22a.2 and 22b.2 and 23.2 and 24.2), the second dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 25.3 and 22a.3 and 22b.3 and 23.3 and 24.3), the third dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 24.4 and 22a.4 and 22b.4 and 23.4 and 24.4), and the fourth dielectric module (Example 1: ex. 25.5 and 22.5) have, in each case, a geometrical thickness of 20 nm to 90 nm.
Examiner note: Examiner notes that other interpretations are also applicable to the current claim language.
Regarding Claim 18,
The method according to claim 15, wherein the composite pane is a windshield of a motor vehicle (ex. “Fig. 1 shows an embodiment of a composite disc 10 according to the invention, which is provided as a windshield of a passenger car.”).
Regarding Claim 20,
The composite pane according to claim 1, wherein the sun shading coating exhibits an external reflection color that is blue both at a viewing angle of 8* and at a viewing angle of 60* wherein, at a viewing angle of 60*, the external reflection color has CIE color coordinates a*R (60*) of -5.0 to 0 (Example 1: -0.1) and b*R (60*) of -8.0 to 0 (Example 1: -3.2), the color coordinates being determined in reflection on the exterior-side surface of the composite pane (see Table 6 and associated description for Example 1, partially reproduced below).
PNG
media_image5.png
329
331
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer in view of Fischer et al. (US 9215760, corresponding to WO 2013/104439 on applicant’s IDS), hereinafter Klaus to avoid confusion.
Regarding Claim 12, Fischer teaches the invention substantially as claimed except for
wherein heating wires are present between the exterior-side surface of the inner pane and the interior- side surface of the outer pane.
Fischer teaches:
When the electrically conductive coating is provided as a heatable coating, it is typically provided with busbars connected to connecting cables which extend beyond the side edge of the composite disk. By means of the connecting cables, the busbars can be connected to an external voltage source. The bus bars are arranged in the edge region along two opposite side edges along a large part of the entire coating width and conduct the electric current as homogeneously as possible into the conductive coating. The bus bars are typically formed as strips of a conductive foil (eg, copper foil) and placed on or over the coating, or printed as a conductive paste (typically containing silver particles and glass frit) on the coating or on the pane under the coating.
That is, while Fischer teaches bus bars “typically formed as strips of a conductive foil (eg, copper foil) and placed on or over the coating” and “connecting cables”, the claimed “heating wires” do not appear to be taught.
Klaus teaches
For a composite pane,
wherein heating wires (13 - busbar and/or 16- feed line, Figs. 2, 4 and Col. 9, lines 56-Col. 10, line 3, Col. 10, lines 32-36) are present between the exterior-side surface of the inner pane and the interior- side surface of the outer pane.
Klaus teaches using either a strip or wire as the busbar (“In an alternative embodiment, thin and narrow metal foil strips or metal wires are used as busbars...”) or using a wire to connect to the busbar (“Alternatively, thin metal wires can also be used as feed lines.”).
Since both references are directed to composite panes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the composite pane of Fischer to use wires as connections (feed lines) to the bus bars and/or swap the strips of conductive foil forming the bus bars for wires as taught by Klaus in order to provide alternative manners of construction to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8, 13, 17, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL QUANDT whose telephone number is (571)272-1247. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Thursday 9-3pm (part-time).
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, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached at (571)272-8648. 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.
MICHAEL QUANDT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/MICHAEL QUANDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
