DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to communication received on 10/7/25.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The text of those sections of AIA 35 U.S.C. code not present in this action can be found in previous office actions dated 9/18/24 and 5/7/25.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/7/25 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Popa et al. US Patent 9,005,694 hereinafter POPA in view of Belleville et al. US PGPub 2014/0037839 hereinafter BELLEVILLE and Caruso et al. US PGPub 2009/0047517 hereinafter CARUSO on claims 1-3 and 5-17 are maintained. The rejection is amended below to meet the amended claim limitation.
As for claim 1, POPA teaches "The invention relates to a method for providing organic, semi-organic, mineral, inorganic and hybrid thin layers and thin layers containing nanoparticles, by simultaneous or alternate spraying of solutions of reactive partners ... on the surface of a solid substrate" (abstract), "Moreover, in the present invention, the film comprises one ( or more) solvent(s ), preferentially water, and "solutes", in other words the reactive partners" (column 5, lines 47-50) and "one of the reactive partners of the method according to the invention is ... a polymer" (column 7, lines 58-60) i.e. a method for preparing a thin layer on at least one surface of a solid substrate comprising first a) spraying onto the surface: - a solution or suspension of an organic polymer in a solvent, whereby a wet layer of the solution or suspension of the organic polymer is obtained on the surface.
POPA is silent on said organic polymer being selected from polyvinyl alcohols.
CARUSO teaches "The invention relates to a multilayer polymer assembly comprising polymer layers covalently bonded together by crosslinks comprising a cyclic moiety, and to processes for the preparation thereof" (abstract) and "It has been found that new, stable multilayer polymer materials may be afforded by using click reactions to covalently crosslink layers of polymer films assembled using a Lbl approach" (paragraph 7).
CARUSO further teaches "The polymer layers of the assembly may comprise any suitable polymer material. The person skilled in the art would understand that the present invention is widely applicable to a range of polymer materials and that the choice of polymer material would depend on the intended end use application. Examples of suitable polymer materials include ... polyalcohols such as poly(vinyl alcohol) ... The person skilled in the art would be able to select an appropriate polymer material suitable for an intended application" (paragraph 47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include said organic polymer being selected from polyvinyl alcohols in the process of POPA because CARUSO teaches that it was well within the skill of the ordinary artisan to pick the appropriate polymer for the desired application and the PVA was one such polymer.
POPA teaches "The thickness of the thin layer obtained by elimination evaporation or drainage) of the solvent( s) contained in the film and/or the crystallisation/precipitation of the products obtained in the film, on contact with the free surface of the substrate according to the method of the present invention, may be comprised between several nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 11, lines 56-62), i.e. b) drying the wet layer ... whereby the thin layer is obtained.
POPA teaches "Advantageously, the technique described in the present application is based on the use of aqueous solutions, an "ecological" method without other solvent than water" (column 4, lines 5-8), i.e. wherein the solvent comprises at least 95% by mass of water.
POPA is silent on drying the wet layer in a static atmosphere.
POPA is generally silent on the method of drying save for a single line in the examples "The coated substrates were then dried with a flow of nitrogen at a pressure of 2 bars" (column 18, lines 28-29).
POPA also teaches "The applications are extremely vast and cover all of the conventional uses of thin layers, such as reflective or anti reflective coatings (for exam pie for photovoltaic cells)" (column 4, lines 39-41 ).
BELLEVILLE teaches "The invention relates to a method for preparing sols of metal oxides, with an aqueous component, which are stable over time and which notably allow the making of thin films having both remarkable optical and abrasion resistance properties" ( abstract, lines 1-4).
BELLEVILLE teaches "Applications: making optical components for power lasers, making optical fibers, cathodic tubes, etc" (abstract, lines 13-14).
BELLEVILLE teaches "Regardless of the deposition technique used, the solvent present in the sol is removed by evaporation, the latter may naturally be accomplished in free air or may be facilitated, for example by applying a gas flow, by thermal or radiative heating insofar that the temperature alters neither the sol, nor the underlying substrate or further by mechanical means such as the rotation of the substrate as during a deposition by spin-coating" (paragraph 53), wherein drying by flow of air is a known equivalent to drying in a free air, i.e. static atmosphere.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have wherein in that drying is carried out in a static atmosphere in the process of POPA because BELLEVILLE teaches that it was a known equivalent to the example process of flow air. It is a prima facie case of obviousness to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
POPA teaches "Thus, the uniform colour of the thin layers exposed to white light indicates a constant refractive index and thus a homogeneous thickness, said thickness of the thin layer conventionally reaches from several hundreds of nanometers several tens of micrometers, according to the spraying time (from several seconds to several tens of minutes)" (column 3, line 64 - column 4, line 2), i.e. wherein the thin layer has a variation in its thickness of no more than 5 nm over the entire surface, for a thickness of the thin layer that has a range that overlaps greater than or equal to 50 nm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 2, POPA teaches "The thickness of the thin layer obtained by elimination ( evaporation or drainage) of the solvent( s) contained in the film and/or the crystallisation/precipitation of the products obtained in the film, on contact with the free surface of the substrate according to the method of the present invention, may be comprised between several nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 11, lines 56-62), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein the thickness of the thin layer is from 5 nm to 300 nm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365- 66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 3, POPA teaches "The thin layer is a compact layer, polycrystalline and/or amorphous, which is advantageously free of defects and of homogeneous thickness" ( column 6, lines 15-18), where homogeneous is understood to be uniform and without variation such that it teaches wherein the thin layer has a variation in its thickness of no more than 5 nm.
As for claim 5, Examiner notes that this claim is further limiting an optional element of the original claim. As the claim does not require that the optional element be performed, this element is similarly an optional element. As such, the claim scope covers the limitation being both present and not present. POPA meets that claim scope as illustrated above.
As for claim 6, POPA teaches "The homogeneity of the thickness of the film is also influenced by the flow of liquid, the nature of the substrate, the viscosity of the liquid ( concentration) and the positioning of the nozzles" (column 10, lines 53-56) and "It may be foreseen that other parameters such as the concentrations of the solutions, the type of nozzle used, the spraying distance, etc., can make it possible to change the characteristics of the thin layers obtained. In addition these parameters 40 are very easily and rapidly adjustable by the method of the present invention, once again proving the ease of adaptation and the robustness of said method" (column 22, lines 35-41 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the concentration of the organic polymer in the solution or suspension such that the desired surface morphology of the final thin film is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
As for claim 7, POPA teaches "The homogeneity of the thickness of the film is also influenced by the flow of liquid, the nature of the substrate, the viscosity of the liquid ( concentration) and the positioning of the nozzles" (column 10, lines 53-56) and "Thus, according to the method of the present invention, the interaction between the reactive partners is advantageously controlled by determination of one at least of the following adjustment parameters: concentration of the reactive partners in each liquid and viscosity of each of the spraying liquids containing the reactive partners" (column 8, lines 24-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the viscosity/surface tension of the organic polymer in the solution or suspension such that the desired surface morphology of the final thin film is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
As for claim 8, POPA teaches "For example, the addition of neutral polymer( s) (in other words not reacting with the reactive partners) in the solvent may increase the viscosity of the solvent" (column 5, lines 62-65), i.e. the solution or suspension of an organic polymer further comprises an additive selected especially from ... thickening agents.
As for claim 9, Examiner notes that this claim is further limiting an optional element of the original claim. As the claim does not require that the optional element be performed, this element is similarly an optional element. As such, the claim scope covers the limitation being both present and not present. POPA meets that claim scope as illustrated above.
As for claim 10, POPA teaches "In addition, the spraying method according to the present invention is easy to use for covering large surfaces with homogeneous layers" (column 4, lines 9-11) and, in the discussion of the prior art, identifies one such large surface as "For treating surfaces of 50 cmx60 cm" (column 3,lines 6-7), wherein that area falls in wherein the surface has a size of at least 400cm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the process of POPA to large surface areas such wherein the surface has a size of at least 400cm2 because POPA teaches that its process was meant to address drawbacks and allow for the application of thin layers to large surfaces such as though.
As for claim 11, POPA teaches "The thickness of the liquid layer may be comprised between ten or so nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 5, lines 45-47), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein the thickness of the wet layer is from 10 μm to 150 μm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d1934 (Fed.Cir.1990); In re Geisler, 116F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 12, POPA teaches "Thus, according to the method of the present invention, the interaction between the reactive partners is advantageously controlled by determination of one at least of the following adjustment parameters ... flow rate of spraying jets of the different liquids" (column 8, lines 24-43), i.e. wherein in step a) one or more of the following parameters, preferably all of the following parameters, are controlled so as to form a continuous wet layer of homogeneous thickness: flow rate ... of the solution or suspension of an organic polymer.
As for claim 14, POPA teaches "The inorganic layers produced by the method according to the present invention may have different applications ... manufacture of layers for optics (for reflective or anti-reflective coatings, photovoltaic cells" ( column 12, line 64 - column 13, line 1 ), i.e. wherein the thin layer is a layer with optical properties. As for claim 15, POPA teaches "The inorganic layers produced by the method according to the present invention may have different applications ... manufacture of layers for optics (for reflective or anti-reflective coatings, photovoltaic cells" ( column 12, line 64 - column 13, line 1 ), i.e. wherein the optical properties are anti-properties.
As for claim 16, POPA teaches "The applications are extremely vast and cover all of the conventional uses of thin layers, such as reflective or antireflective coatings (for exam pie for photovoltaic cells)" (column 4, lines 39-41 ), wherein solar light is a form of radiation and photovoltaic cells are exposed to it, i.e. wherein the thin layer is an antireflective layer of a coating of a surface subjected to ... other radiation.
As for claim 17, POPA teaches "The same thicknesses of thin layers are obtained, whether said thin layers are produced in a single step or in several steps, the important thing being that the total spraying time is constant, even if the thin layer is dried after each step" ( column 9, lines 31-34), i.e. a method for preparing a coating comprising a plurality of layers on at least one surface of a solid substrate wherein at least one of the layers ... is deposited by the method according to claim 1.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Popa et al. US Patent 9,005,694 hereinafter POPA and Belleville et al. US PG Pub 2014/0037839 hereinafter BELLEVILLE and Caruso et al. US PGPub 2009/0047517 hereinafter CARUSO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of ZHENG et al. US PGPub 2012/0028005 hereinafter ZHENG on claim 13 is maintained. The rejection is repeated below for convenience.
As for claim 13, POPA and BELLEVILLE are silent on wherein drying is carried out at a temperature of 18 to 50°C, for a duration of 10 minutes to 90 minutes.
POPA teaches "The method known as "layer by layer" ( also known by the technical name "Lbl"), which is mainly applied with polyanions and polycations, has thus been extended in the present invention by means of sprayings of solutions, preferentially aqueous" (column 3, lines 16-20).
POPA teaches "The same thicknesses of thin layers are obtained, whether said thin layers are produced in a single step or in several steps, the important thing being that the total spraying time is constant, even if the thin layer is dried after each step" (column 9, lines 31-34).
ZHENG teaches "An optical article comprising a substrate and on at least one face of the substrate a multilayered antireflecting coating" (abstract, lines 1-2) and "The invention is based on the use of a layer-by-layer (Lbl) coating to form the outermost layer of a multilayered antireflecting coating" (paragraph 3, lines 1-3).
ZHENG teaches "Before the crosslinking step, the Lbl coating is at least partially dried, preferably in the air, at ambient temperature during typically 5 minutes to 1 hour, preferably 10 to 20 minutes" (paragraph 128), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein drying is carried out at a temperature of 18 to 50°C, for a duration of 10 minutes to 90 minutes. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date have a drying that overlaps with a range that overlaps with wherein drying is carried out at a temperature of 18 to 50°C, for a duration of 10 minutes to 90 minutes in the process of POPA because ZHENG teaches that such conditions were proper for the removal of water from layer by layer applied layers.
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over 1-3, 5- 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popa et al. US Patent 9,005,694 hereinafter POPA in view of Sahadevan et al. US PGPub 2019/0193033 hereinafter SAHADEVAN and Caruso et al. US PGPub 2009/0047517 hereinafter CARUSO on claims 1-3 and 5-18 are maintained. The rejection is amended below to meet the amended claim limitations.
As for claim 1, POPA teaches "The invention relates to a method for providing organic, semi-organic, mineral, inorganic and hybrid thin layers and thin layers containing nanoparticles, by simultaneous or alternate spraying of solutions of reactive partners ... on the surface of a solid substrate" (abstract), "Moreover, in the present invention, the film comprises one ( or more) solvent(s ), preferentially water, and "solutes", in other words the reactive partners" (column 5, lines 47-50) and "one of the reactive partners of the method according to the invention is ... a polymer" (column 7, lines 58-60) i.e. a method for preparing a thin layer on at least one surface of a solid substrate comprising first a) spraying onto the surface: - a solution or suspension of an organic polymer in a solvent, whereby a wet layer of the solution or suspension of the organic polymer is obtained on the surface.
POPA is silent on said organic polymer being selected from polyvinyl alcohols.
CARUSO teaches "The invention relates to a multilayer polymer assembly comprising polymer layers covalently bonded together by crosslinks comprising a cyclic moiety, and to processes for the preparation thereof" (abstract) and "It has been found that new, stable multilayer polymer materials may be afforded by using click reactions to covalently crosslink layers of polymer films assembled using a Lbl approach" (paragraph 7).
CARUSO further teaches "The polymer layers of the assembly may comprise any suitable polymer material. The person skilled in the art would understand that the present invention is widely applicable to a range of polymer materials and that the choice of polymer material would depend on the intended end use application. Examples of suitable polymer materials include ... polyalcohols such as poly(vinyl alcohol) ... The person skilled in the art would be able to select an appropriate polymer material suitable for an intended application" (paragraph 47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include said organic polymer being selected from polyvinyl alcohols in the process of POPA because CARUSO teaches that it was well within the skill of the ordinary artisan to pick the appropriate polymer for the desired application and the PVA was one such polymer.
POPA teaches "The thickness of the thin layer obtained by elimination evaporation or drainage) of the solvent( s) contained in the film and/or the crystallisation/precipitation of the products obtained in the film, on contact with the free surface of the substrate according to the method of the present invention, may be comprised between several nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 11, lines 56-62), i.e. b) drying the wet layer ... whereby the thin layer is obtained.
POPA teaches "Advantageously, the technique described in the present application is based on the use of aqueous solutions, an "ecological" method without other solvent than water" (column 4, lines 5-8), i.e. wherein the solvent comprises at least 95% by mass of water.
POPA is silent on drying the wet layer in a static atmosphere.
POPA is generally silent on the method of drying save for a single line in the examples "The coated substrates were then dried with a flow of nitrogen at a pressure of 2 bars" (column 18, lines 28-29).
POPA also teaches "The applications are extremely vast and cover all of the conventional uses of thin layers, such as reflective or anti reflective coatings (for example for photovoltaic cells)" (column 4, lines 39-41 ).
SAHADEVAN teaches "This invention relates thin film nanocomposites (TFNCs) and methods of preparing the same by molecular layer-by-layer assembly" (paragraph 3, lines 1-3).
SAHADEVAN teaches "The drying step can be performed in an oven or under a condition to speed up the drying, e.g., under a vacuum" (paragraph 82, lines 5-7), i.e. drying is carried out in a static atmosphere.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include drying is carried out in a static atmosphere in the process of POPA because SAHADEVAN teaches that such a process can speed up drying.
POPA teaches "Thus, the uniform colour of the thin layers exposed to white light indicates a constant refractive index and thus a homogeneous thickness, said thickness of the thin layer conventionally reaches from several hundreds of nanometers several tens of micrometers, according to the spraying time (from several seconds to several tens of minutes)" (column 3, line 64 - column 4, line 2), i.e. wherein the thin layer has a variation in its thickness of no more than 5 nm over the entire surface, for a thickness of the thin layer that has a range that overlaps greater than or equal to 50 nm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 2, POPA teaches "The thickness of the thin layer obtained by elimination ( evaporation or drainage) of the solvent( s) contained in the film and/or the crystallisation/precipitation of the products obtained in the film, on contact with the free surface of the substrate according to the method of the present invention, may be comprised between several nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 11, lines 56-62), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein the thickness of the thin layer is from 5 nm to 300 nm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365- 66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 3, POPA teaches "The thin layer is a compact layer, polycrystalline and/or amorphous, which is advantageously free of defects and of homogeneous thickness" ( column 6, lines 15-18), where homogeneous is understood to be uniform and without variation such that it teaches wherein the thin layer has a variation in its thickness of no more than 5 nm.
As for claim 5, Examiner notes that this claim is further limiting an optional element of the original claim. As the claim does not require that the optional element be performed, this element is similarly an optional element. As such, the claim scope covers the limitation being both present and not present. POPA meets that claim scope as illustrated above.
As for claim 6, POPA teaches "The homogeneity of the thickness of the film is also influenced by the flow of liquid, the nature of the substrate, the viscosity of the liquid ( concentration) and the positioning of the nozzles" (column 10, lines 53-56) and "It may be foreseen that other parameters such as the concentrations of the solutions, the type of nozzle used, the spraying distance, etc., can make it possible to change the characteristics of the thin layers obtained. In addition these parameters 40 are very easily and rapidly adjustable by the method of the present invention, once again proving the ease of adaptation and the robustness of said method" (column 22, lines 35-41 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the concentration of the organic polymer in the solution or suspension such that the desired surface morphology of the final thin film is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
As for claim 7, POPA teaches "The homogeneity of the thickness of the film is also influenced by the flow of liquid, the nature of the substrate, the viscosity of the liquid ( concentration) and the positioning of the nozzles" (column 10, lines 53-56) and "Thus, according to the method of the present invention, the interaction between the reactive partners is advantageously controlled by determination of one at least of the following adjustment parameters: concentration of the reactive partners in each liquid and viscosity of each of the spraying liquids containing the reactive partners" (column 8, lines 24-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the viscosity/surface tension of the organic polymer in the solution or suspension such that the desired surface morphology of the final thin film is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
As for claim 8, POPA teaches "For example, the addition of neutral polymer( s) (in other words not reacting with the reactive partners) in the solvent may increase the viscosity of the solvent" (column 5, lines 62-65), i.e. the solution or suspension of an organic polymer further comprises an additive selected especially from ... thickening agents.
As for claim 9, Examiner notes that this claim is further limiting an optional element of the original claim. As the claim does not require that the optional element be performed, this element is similarly an optional element. As such, the claim scope covers the limitation being both present and not present. POP A meets that claim scope as illustrated above.
As for claim 10, POPA teaches "In addition, the spraying method according to the present invention is easy to use for covering large surfaces with homogeneous layers" (column 4, lines 9-11) and, in the discussion of the prior art, identifies one such large surface as "For treating surfaces of 50 cmx60 cm" (column 3,lines 6-7), wherein that area falls in wherein the surface has a size of at least 400cm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the process of POPA to large surface areas such wherein the surface has a size of at least 400cm2 because POPA teaches that its process was meant to address drawbacks and allow for the application of thin layers to large surfaces such as though.
As for claim 11, POPA teaches "The thickness of the liquid layer may be comprised between ten or so nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 5, lines 45-47), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein the thickness of the wet layer is from 10 μm to 150 μm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d1934 (Fed.Cir.1990); In re Geisler, 116F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
As for claim 12, POPA teaches "Thus, according to the method of the present invention, the interaction between the reactive partners is advantageously controlled by determination of one at least of the following adjustment parameters ... flow rate of spraying jets of the different liquids" (column 8, lines 24-43), i.e. wherein in step a) one or more of the following parameters, preferably all of the following parameters, are controlled so as to form a continuous wet layer of homogeneous thickness: flow rate ... of the solution or suspension of an organic polymer.
As for claim 14, POPA teaches "The inorganic layers produced by the method according to the present invention may have different applications ... manufacture of layers for optics (for reflective or anti-reflective coatings, photovoltaic cells" ( column 12, line 64 - column 13, line 1 ), i.e. wherein the thin layer is a layer with optical properties.
As for claim 15, POPA teaches "The inorganic layers produced by the method according to the present invention may have different applications ... manufacture of layers for optics (for reflective or anti-reflective coatings, photovoltaic cells" ( column 12, line 64 - column 13, line 1 ), i.e. wherein the optical properties are anti-properties.
As for claim 16, POPA teaches "The applications are extremely vast and cover all of the conventional uses of thin layers, such as reflective or antireflective coatings (for exam pie for photovoltaic cells)" (column 4, lines 39-41 ), wherein solar light is a form of radiation and photovoltaic cells are exposed to it, i.e. wherein the thin layer is an antireflective layer of a coating of a surface subjected to ... other radiation.
As for claim 17, POPA teaches "The same thicknesses of thin layers are obtained, whether said thin layers are produced in a single step or in several steps, the important thing being that the total spraying time is constant, even if the thin layer is dried after each step" ( column 9, lines 31-34), i.e. a method for preparing a coating comprising a plurality of layers on at least one surface of a solid substrate wherein at least one of the layers ... is deposited by the method according to claim 1.
As for claim 18, POPA teaches "The invention relates to a method for providing organic, semi-organic, mineral, inorganic and hybrid thin layers and thin layers containing nanoparticles, by simultaneous or alternate spraying of solutions of reactive partners ... on the surface of a solid substrate" (abstract), "Moreover, in the present invention, the film comprises one ( or more) solvent(s ), preferentially water, and "solutes", in other words the reactive partners" (column 5, lines 47-50) and "one of the reactive partners of the method according to the invention is ... a polymer" (column 7, lines 58-60) i.e. a method for preparing a thin layer on at least one surface of a solid substrate comprising first a) spraying onto the surface: - a solution or suspension of an organic polymer in a solvent, whereby a wet layer of the solution or suspension of the organic polymer is obtained on the surface.
POPA is silent on said organic polymer being selected from polyvinyl alcohols.
CARUSO teaches "The invention relates to a multilayer polymer assembly comprising polymer layers covalently bonded together by crosslinks comprising a cyclic moiety, and to processes for the preparation thereof" (abstract) and "It has been found that new, stable multilayer polymer materials may be afforded by using click reactions to covalently crosslink layers of polymer films assembled using a Lbl approach" (paragraph 7).
CARUSO further teaches "The polymer layers of the assembly may comprise any suitable polymer material. The person skilled in the art would understand that the present invention is widely applicable to a range of polymer materials and that the choice of polymer material would depend on the intended end use application. Examples of suitable polymer materials include ... polyalcohols such as poly(vinyl alcohol) ... The person skilled in the art would be able to select an appropriate polymer material suitable for an intended application" (paragraph 47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include said organic polymer being selected from polyvinyl alcohols in the process of POPA because CARUSO teaches that it was well within the skill of the ordinary artisan to pick the appropriate polymer for the desired application and the PVA was one such polymer.
POPA teaches "The thickness of the thin layer obtained by elimination evaporation or drainage) of the solvent( s) contained in the film and/or the crystallisation/precipitation of the products obtained in the film, on contact with the free surface of the substrate according to the method of the present invention, may be comprised between several nanometers and several hundreds of microns" (column 11, lines 56-62), i.e. b) drying the wet layer ... whereby the thin layer is obtained.
POPA teaches "Advantageously, the technique described in the present application is based on the use of aqueous solutions, an "ecological" method without other solvent than water" (column 4, lines 5-8), i.e. wherein the solvent comprises at least 95% by mass of water.
POPA is silent on drying the wet layer in a closed, hermetic enclosure in which there is no circulation, flow of air or any other gas.
POPA is generally silent on the method of drying save for a single line in the examples "The coated substrates were then dried with a flow of nitrogen at a pressure of 2 bars" (column 18, lines 28-29).
POPA also teaches "The applications are extremely vast and cover all of the conventional uses of thin layers, such as reflective or anti reflective coatings (for exam pie for photovoltaic cells)" (column 4, lines 39-41 ).
SAHADEVAN teaches "This invention relates thin film nanocomposites (TFNCs) and methods of preparing the same by molecular layer-by-layer assembly" (paragraph 3, lines 1-3).
SAHADEVAN teaches "The drying step can be performed in an oven or under a condition to speed up the drying, e.g., under a vacuum" (paragraph 82, lines 5-7). Examiner notes that a vacuum must take place in a hermetically sealed chamber and there is no air flow in the vacuum because there is no air, i.e. drying the wet layer in a closed, hermetic enclosure in which there is no circulation, flow of air or any other gas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein drying is carried out in a closed, hermetic enclosure in which there is no circulation, flow of air or any other gas in the process of POPA because SAHADEVAN teaches that such a process can speed up drying.
POPA teaches "Thus, the uniform colour of the thin layers exposed to white light indicates a constant refractive index and thus a homogeneous thickness, said thickness of the thin layer conventionally reaches from several hundreds of nanometers several tens of micrometers, according to the spraying time (from several seconds to several tens of minutes)" (column 3, line 64 - column 4, line 2), i.e. wherein the thin layer has a variation in its thickness of no more than 5 nm over the entire surface, for a thickness of the thin layer that has a range that overlaps greater than or equal to 50 nm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popa et al. US Patent 9,005,694 hereinafter POPA and Belleville et al. US PG Pub 2014/0037839 hereinafter BELLEVILLE and Caruso et al. US PGPub 2009/0047517 hereinafter CARUSO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of ZHENG et al. US PGPub 2012/0028005 hereinafter ZHENG.
As for claim 19, POPA, BELLVILLE and CARUSO are silent on wherein the static drying is performed for between 10 min and 60 minutes.
ZHENG teaches "An optical article comprising a substrate and on at least one face of the substrate a multilayered antireflecting coating" (abstract, lines 1-2) and "The invention is based on the use of a layer-by-layer (Lbl) coating to form the outermost layer of a multilayered antireflecting coating" (paragraph 3, lines 1-3).
ZHENG teaches "Before the crosslinking step, the Lbl coating is at least partially dried, preferably in the air, at ambient temperature during typically 5 minutes to 1 hour, preferably 10 to 20 minutes" (paragraph 128), i.e. a range that overlaps with wherein drying is carried out at a temperature of 18 to 50°C, for a duration of 10 minutes to 90 minutes. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popa et al. US Patent 9,005,694 hereinafter POPA and Belleville et al. US PG Pub 2014/0037839 hereinafter BELLEVILLE and Caruso et al. US PGPub 2009/0047517 hereinafter CARUSO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Makino et al. US PGPub 2020/0379144 hereinafter MAKINO.
As for claim 20, POPA, BELLVILLE and CARUSO are silent on wherein the static drying is performed for between 10 min and 60 minutes.
MAKINO teaches “An optical member that has excellent antireflection properties and that can maintain antifogging properties over a long term” (abstract, lines 1-3), “The solvent that can be used in a sol-gel solution, a dispersion liquid containing particles, or a dispersion liquid containing polymer particles for forming the moisture- retaining layer 20 may be any solvent as long as the raw material is homogeneously dissolved and the reaction product does not precipitate” (paragraph 79, lines 1-6) and “Examples of the method for forming the moisture retaining layer 20 by using a metal oxide precursor of a dispersion liquid containing metal oxide particles include… a spraying method” (paragraph 81, lines 1-4).
MAKINO teaches “After the liquid for forming the moisture-retaining layer 20 is supplied onto the substrate 10, drying and/or curing is performed. Drying and curing are performed to remove the solvent or accelerate the reaction of the binder itself or the reaction between the binder and the particles. The drying and/or curing temperature is preferably 15° C. or more and 200° C. or less and more preferably 60° C. or more and 150° C. or less. When the drying and curing temperatures are less than 15° C., the solvent may remain and the wear resistance may be degraded. Moreover, when the drying and/or curing temperature exceeds 200° C., the binder is excessively cured and may undergo cracking. The drying and/or curing time is preferably 5 minutes or more and 24 hours or less and more preferably 15 minutes or more and 5 hours or less. When the drying and curing time is less than 5 minutes, the solvent partially remains, and fogging may occur in some part. When the drying and curing time exceeds 24 hours, the film may become susceptible to cracking. After the liquid for forming the moisture-retaining layer 20 is supplied onto the substrate 10, drying and/or curing is performed. Drying and curing are performed to remove the solvent or accelerate the reaction of the binder itself or the reaction between the binder and the particles… The drying and/or curing time is preferably 5 minutes or more and 24 hours or less and more preferably 15 minutes or more and 5 hours or less. When the drying and curing time is less than 5 minutes, the solvent partially remains, and fogging may occur in some part. When the drying and curing time exceeds 24 hours, the film may become susceptible to cracking” (paragraph 82).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the drying time such that the desired removal of solvent without fogging and cracking is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popa et al. US Patent 9,005,694 hereinafter POPA in view of Sahadevan et al. US PGPub 2019/0193033 hereinafter SAHADEVAN and Caruso et al. US PGPub 2009/0047517 hereinafter CARUSO as applied to claim 1 and 18 above, and further in view of Makino et al. US PGPub 2020/0379144 hereinafter MAKINO.
As for claim 19, POPA, SAHADEVAN and CARUSO are silent on wherein the drying is performed for between 10 min and 60 minutes.
MAKINO teaches “An optical member that has excellent antireflection properties and that can maintain antifogging properties over a long term” (abstract, lines 1-3), “The solvent that can be used in a sol-gel solution, a dispersion liquid containing particles, or a dispersion liquid containing polymer particles for forming the moisture- retaining layer 20 may be any solvent as long as the raw material is homogeneously dissolved and the reaction product does not precipitate” (paragraph 79, lines 1-6) and “Examples of the method for forming the moisture retaining layer 20 by using a metal oxide precursor of a dispersion liquid containing metal oxide particles include… a spraying method” (paragraph 81, lines 1-4).
MAKINO teaches “After the liquid for forming the moisture-retaining layer 20 is supplied onto the substrate 10, drying and/or curing is performed. Drying and curing are performed to remove the solvent or accelerate the reaction of the binder itself or the reaction between the binder and the particles. The drying and/or curing temperature is preferably 15° C. or more and 200° C. or less and more preferably 60° C. or more and 150° C. or less. When the drying and curing temperatures are less than 15° C., the solvent may remain and the wear resistance may be degraded. Moreover, when the drying and/or curing temperature exceeds 200° C., the binder is excessively cured and may undergo cracking. The drying and/or curing time is preferably 5 minutes or more and 24 hours or less and more preferably 15 minutes or more and 5 hours or less. When the drying and curing time is less than 5 minutes, the solvent partially remains, and fogging may occur in some part. When the drying and curing time exceeds 24 hours, the film may become susceptible to cracking. After the liquid for forming the moisture-retaining layer 20 is supplied onto the substrate 10, drying and/or curing is performed. Drying and curing are performed to remove the solvent or accelerate the reaction of the binder itself or the reaction between the binder and the particles… The drying and/or curing time is preferably 5 minutes or more and 24 hours or less and more preferably 15 minutes or more and 5 hours or less. When the drying and curing time is less than 5 minutes, the solvent partially remains, and fogging may occur in some part. When the drying and curing time exceeds 24 hours, the film may become susceptible to cracking” (paragraph 82).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the drying time such that the desired removal of solvent without fogging and cracking is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
As for claim 20, POPA, SAHADEVAN and CARUSO are silent on wherein the static drying is performed for between 10 min and 60 minutes.
MAKINO teaches “An optical member that has excellent antireflection properties and that can maintain antifogging properties over a long term” (abstract, lines 1-3), “The solvent that can be used in a sol-gel solution, a dispersion liquid containing particles, or a dispersion liquid containing polymer particles for forming the moisture- retaining layer 20 may be any solvent as long as the raw material is homogeneously dissolved and the reaction product does not precipitate” (paragraph 79, lines 1-6) and “Examples of the method for forming the moisture retaining layer 20 by using a metal oxide precursor of a dispersion liquid containing metal oxide particles include… a spraying method” (paragraph 81, lines 1-4).
MAKINO teaches “After the liquid for forming the moisture-retaining layer 20 is supplied onto the substrate 10, drying and/or curing is performed. Drying and curing are performed to remove the solvent or accelerate the reaction of the binder itself or the reaction between the binder and the particles. The drying and/or curing temperature is preferably 15° C. or more and 200° C. or less and more preferably 60° C. or more and 150° C. or less. When the drying and curing temperatures are less than 15° C., the solvent may remain and the wear resistance may be degraded. Moreover, when the drying and/or curing temperature exceeds 200° C., the binder is excessively cured and may undergo cracking. The drying and/or curing time is preferably 5 minutes or more and 24 hours or less and more preferably 15 minutes or more and 5 hours or less. When the drying and curing time is less than 5 minutes, the solvent partially remains, and fogging may occur in some part. When the drying and curing time exceeds 24 hours, the film may become susceptible to cracking. After the liquid for forming the moisture-retaining layer 20 is supplied onto the substrate 10, drying and/or curing is performed. Drying and curing are performed to remove the solvent or accelerate the reaction of the binder itself or the reaction between the binder and the particles… The drying and/or curing time is preferably 5 minutes or more and 24 hours or less and more preferably 15 minutes or more and 5 hours or less. When the drying and curing time is less than 5 minutes, the solvent partially remains, and fogging may occur in some part. When the drying and curing time exceeds 24 hours, the film may become susceptible to cracking” (paragraph 82).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to design the drying time such that the desired removal of solvent without fogging and cracking is achieved. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/7/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s principal arguments are summarized and addressed below:
(a) Applicant argues that a static atmosphere is one "especially without circulation, flow of air or any other gas on and around the surface" and that an example of a preferred static atmosphere is recited in claim 18 which is a closed hermetic enclosure in which there is no circulation flow of air or any other gas. Applicant then goes on to argue that free air drying (evaporation), the sample is exposed to room air and the air is naturally renewed by currents and/or ventilation, which promotes evaporation and is usually expected to make the drying process faster.
Examiner makes the following notes:
1) Applicant is reading in limitations from later claims and the specification to overcome the art on record. There is no requirement that a 'static atmosphere'. Specifically, they are treating the preferred embodiment from the specification and a further limiting dependent claim to define static atmosphere in a way that is convenient to removing the art but would actually cause dependency issues if accepted.
2) Applicant alleges that BELLEVILLE's room air is renewed by currents and/or ventilation, but provides no evidence that this is the case. In fact, BELLEVILLE's actual statements contradict this assertion. BELLEVILLE specifically states "the solvent present in the sol is removed by evaporation, the latter may naturally be accomplished in free air or may be facilitated, for example by applying a gas flow, by thermal or radiative heating" (paragraph 53, lines 1-3). Why does Belleville feel the need to mention that a flow of gas can be included in the drying the process in free air to improve evaporation if a flow of gas is already present in free air improving e