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 without traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on Nov. 24, 2025 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 2 recites in lines 3-5 : “the plurality of spacers is perpendicularly disposed between the bottom plate and the second conductive layer and divides a space between the bottom plate and the second conductive layer into the plurality of lattices.” The instant specification discloses that the plurality of spacers is perpendicularly disposed between the bottom plate and the first conductive layer and divides a space between the bottom plate and the first conductive layer into the plurality of lattices (Specification, par. [0037]). 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 (s) 1 -8, 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2022/0011625 A1), in view of Wild et al. (US 2020/0409199 A1) (“Wild”). With respect to claim 1, Li discloses a liquid crystal film ( abstr ., 0016) for automotive glass (0003-0004), comprising a first base layer – element 202 – a second base layer – element 212 (0098, Fig. 4A), a first conductive layer disposed o n the first base layer, a second conductive layer disposed on a side of the second base layer, close to the first conductive layer – the base layers are coated and patterned with conductive materials for driving an electric field across liquid crystal to control light transmittance (0070), a liquid crystal layer – element 214 - disposed between the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer (0077, 0095, Fig. 4A), wherein the liquid crystal layer comprises a plurality of spacers, and a liquid crystal mixture, the plurality of spacers – elements 208 and 402 - being perpendicularly disposed between the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer (0096, 0097, Fig. 4A), wherein the liquid crystal layer divides a space between the first conductive layer and the second conductive laye r (Fig. 4). Li discloses the spacers within the liquid crystal layer form lattices, wherein the liquid crystal mixture is filled in the plurality of lattices (0067, Fig. 4A), but is silent with respect to a shape of each of the plurality of lattices being polygonal. Wild discloses a liquid crystal layer for optical components (0002), wherein each of the plurality of lattices is a polygonal lattice , spacers being incorporated into the lattices ( abstr ., 0006, 0025). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the liquid crystal layer of Li wherein the spacers are incorporated into a plurality of lattices , wherein each of the plurality of lattices has a polygonal shape as it is known in the art of liquid crystal optical devices to include spacers so that they are part of lattices, the lattices having polygonal shape for support (0006). Regarding claim 2, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1. Li discloses the film comprises a bottom plate – bottom element 404 - disposed on the second conductive layer, the plurality of space r s being perpendicularly disposed between the bottom plate and the first conductive layer , and divides a space between the bottom plate and the first conductive layer into a plurality of lattices ( 0098, Fig. 4A). As to claim 3, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1. Li discloses the bottom plate and the plurality of lattices are integrally formed by a curing glue (0098). With respect to claim 4, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1. Wild discloses the shape of each of the plurality of lattices is regular hexagonal (0025). Regarding claim 5, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1 . Wild discloses the shape of each of the plurality of lattices is regular quadrilateral (0025). With respect to claim 6, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 2. Li does not state explicitly what is the thickness of the bottom plate, however, Li discloses that the thickness of the bottom plate – element 404 - is adjusted according to a target degree of haze and resistance to deformation (0099), th u s, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the thickness of the bottom plate of Li in order to obtain the desired degree of haze and resistance to deformation. As to claim 7, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1. Wild discloses a thickness of each of the plurality of spacers of 10 µm (0055), which is within the recited range. With respect to claim 8, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 4. Wild discloses a maximum diameter of the shape of each of the plurality of lattices calculated based o n the spacer diameter and the spacer density is overlapping the recited range (0055, 0056). Overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Regarding claim 12, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1. Li discloses the first base layer and the second base layer can be PET films or polycarbonate flexible material (0070). With respect to claim 13, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1. Li discloses indium tin oxide as first and second conductive layers (0070), which are known in the art to be transparent. Claim (s) 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, in view of Wild, and further in view of Hakemi et al. (US 6049366) (“ Hakemi ”). With respect to claim 9, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1, but are silent regarding the liquid crystal mixture as recited in the claim. Hakemi discloses a film coated with liquid crystal mixture (col. 4, lines 37-65) for use in electrooptical device (col. 2, lines 30-44), the liquid crystal mixture comprising liquid crystal, chiral agent and glue ( abstr ., col. 29, lines 42-44). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include liquid crystal, chiral agent and glue in the liquid crystal mixture of the film of Li and Wild, as the recited components are known in the art of liquid crystal mixtures used in optical films. The claim defines the product by how the product is made, thus, claim 9 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps (MPEP 2113). In the instant case the recited steps imply the structure of claim 9. The references teach the structure. Regarding claim 11, Li, Wild and Hakemi teach the film of claim 9. Li discloses the liquid crystal ca n be TN liquid crystal or GH liquid crystal ((0079, 0084, 0085). Claim (s) 1 0 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, in view of Wild , and further in view of Kobayashi e t al. (US 5680185) (“Kobayashi”). With respect to claim 10, Li and Wild teach the film of claim 1, but are silent regarding the liquid crystal mixture as recited in the claim. Kobayashi discloses a liquid crystal display apparatus comprising liquid crystal medium comprising liquid crystal, chiral agent and microparticles ( abstr ., col. 9, lines 27-48, col. 10, lines 4-13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include liquid crystal, chiral agent and microparticles in the liquid crystal mixture as recited in the claim, as the recited components are known in the art of liquid crystal mixtures. The claim defines the product by how the product is made, thus, claim 10 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps (MPEP 2113). In the instant case the recited steps imply the structure of claim 10. The references teach the structure. Information Disclosure Statement The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JOANNA PLESZCZYNSKA whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1617 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F ~ 11:30-8 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Maria Veronica Ewald can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /Joanna Pleszczynska/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783