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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-10 and 16-18, in the reply filed on February 26, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious burden on the Examiner to search the entire application. This is not found persuasive given the technical feature linking the inventions of Groups I and II does not provide a contribution over the prior art (see below discussion), and no single general inventive concept exits. As such, there is a lack of unity among Groups I and II. Note that if the examiner finds that a national stage application lacks unity of invention under § 1.475, the examiner may in an Office action require the applicant in the response to that action to elect the invention to which the claims shall be restricted, see MPEP 1893.03(d).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 11-15, 19 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on February 26, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 7 and 18 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 the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
It is unclear if the percentage of the substrate surface coated with the fibrous structure refers to the percentage of the lower face coated or the percentage of the entire substrate surface coated. Given Applicant’s specification discloses the coating is on the lower face, it appears Applicant intends to claim the percentage of the lower face that is coated, see Applicant’s specification page 2 line 30 – page 3 line 2. Note, however, that the claims are rejected using both interpretations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bockmeyer et al. (US 2015/0037563).
Regarding claim 1, Bockmeyer discloses a coating material that includes a sol-gel coating system, pigments, and chain-line or fibrous nanoparticles, see abstract. The coating system is stable at high temperatures and is suitable for glass or glass-ceramic substrates having a low thermal expansion coefficient, see abstract. The reference further discloses the sol-gel material as a hybrid polymer sol-gel and as including bis-epoxides, which corresponds to a resin matrix [0031 & 0089]. Note that the location of the coating “on its lower face” is considered subjective relative to the orientation of the article. Given the reference discloses the coating is provided on the surface of a substrate, the reference is considered to disclose a face of the article as coated, see Fig. 1 and [0146-0148].
Regarding claim 2, the reference discloses the fibrous nanoparticles as SiO2, which corresponds to quartz [0051].
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the reference discloses the hybrid polymer sol-gel as comprising bis-epoxides, which corresponds to a thermosetting resin and an epoxy [0031 & 0089].
Regarding claim 6, it is expected that the fibrous structure comprises a multi-axial structure given the fibers are particles are dispersed in a solvent during the method of making the coating, see Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 7, the reference discloses the coating as on the entire surface of the substrate, see Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 8, the reference discloses the coating material has a thermal coefficient of linear expansion of less than 5*10-6/K whereas examples of the glass-ceramic substrate have a coefficient of thermal expansion of 0±0.3*10-6/K [0119 & 0136]. As such, it is expected that the coating has an expansion coefficient greater than the expansion coefficient of the glass-ceramic substrate.
Regarding claim 16, the reference discloses the substrate as a glass-ceramic plate, see abstract and Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 18, the reference discloses the coating as on the entire surface of the substrate, see Fig. 3.
Claims 3, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Bockmeyer et al. (US 2015/0037563) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Florent et al. (US 2005/0214545).
Bockmeyer discloses a glass-ceramic substrate coated with a fiber-containing resin, see above discussion.
Regarding claims 3 and 7, he reference, however, fails to disclose the claimed fiber density.
Florent discloses a glass-ceramic plate coated with a reinforcement layer comprising a polymer and inorganic fillers with the effective amount of mineral fillers advantageously occurring within the reinforcing layer of the invention generally corresponds to a volume content of 10 to 60%, see abstract and [0026 & 0051]. The fillers ensure the layers cohesion and/or its coloration [0049]. They also act to at least mechanically reinforce the reinforcing layer [0049].
While the references do not specifically disclose the claimed fiber density, wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, absent a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the volume, and therefore density, of the fibrous nanoparticles of Bockmeyer in order to improve cohesion as well as to mechanically reinforce the layer.
Regarding claim 18, the reference fails to disclose the coating on at least 60% of the surface of the substrate.
Florent discloses the reinforcement coating can be applied to both parallel sides of the substrate to provide reinforcement to its two main sides [0016-0021].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to apply the coating to both surface of the substrate in Bockmeyer in order to reinforce both sides. Note that applying coating to both sides of the substrate is considered to disclose the coating on at least 60% of the substrate.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Bockmeyer et al. (US 2015/0037563) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Di Giovanni et al. (US 2013/0098903).
Bockmeyer discloses a glass-ceramic substrate coated with a fiber-containing resin, see above discussion.
The reference, however, fails to disclose an enamel coating on certain parts of the substrate surface and arranged on the upper face of the substrate.
Di Giovanni discloses a cooking device comprising a plate with a decoration on the upper face, generally made of enamel, that makes it possible to identify heating zones, control zones, and zones for information or a logo, see abstract and [0055].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary for the substrate of Bockmeyer to have an enamel decorative coating on its upper surface in order to make it possible to identify heating and control zones as well as zones for information or a logo.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A AUER whose telephone number is (571)270-5669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 4 pm 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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571)272-8519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LAURA A AUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights