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
Claims 1-7, 9- 15 and 18-20 are pending. Claims 1 and 15 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new references being used in the rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 4-7, 13, 15, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa WO2016043164Al in view of Li CN215895169.
Regarding claim 1, Ogawa teaches a dimming window (fig. 6), comprising: at least two chambers (left, right chambers; fig. 6) arranged in a stack (see fig. 6), each of the chambers (left, right chambers; fig. 6) comprising two light-transmitting substrates (1 8, 62, I6) arranged opposite to each other (see fig. 6); the at least two chambers (left, right chambers; fig. 6) comprise a first chamber (left chamber) and a second chamber (right chamber), a dimming structure (14) is provided in the first chamber (left chamber), and a first reflective film (16/62/18; lines 285-302) is provided in the first chamber (left chamber) and/or the second chamber (right chamber).
However, Ogawa does not explicitly disclose wherein the thickness of the second chamber is greater than the thickness of the first chamber, the thickness of the chamber is a distance between two opposite surfaces of the two light-transmitting substrates of the chamber, wherein the thickness of the second chamber is 6-20mm.
Li teaches wherein the thickness of the second chamber (chamber between 11, 21; fig.
6), is greater than the thickness of the first chamber (chamber between I 0, 21; fig. 6), the thickness of the chamber (chambers 11, 21; 10, 21) is a distance between two opposite surfaces of the two light-transmitting substrates (fig. 6) of the chamber (chambers 11, 21; 10, 21), wherein the thickness of the second chamber (chamber 11, 21) is 6-20mm (distance between the first reflective film 13 and the second reflective film 15 ranges 10mm-14mm; fig. 6; [0069]) for the purpose of providing an arrangement that protect the dimming component, is more uniform and reduces the problems such as cracking or black spots ([0065]).
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 dimming window of Ogawa to include the structure of Li for the purpose of providing an arrangement that protect the dimming component sand is more uniform and reduces the problems such as cracking or black spots ([0065]).
Regarding claim 4, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 1, wherein the first chamber (left chamber) comprises a first light-transmitting substrate (18; lines 285-302) and a second light-transmitting substrate (62) arranged opposite to each other (see fig. 6); the second chamber (right chamber) comprises a third light-transmitting substrate (16; lines 285-302) and the second light-transmitting substrate (62) arranged opposite to each other
(see fig. 6); the dimming structure (14) is located on a side of the first light-transmitting substrate (18), the side of the first light-transmitting substrate (18) is close to the second light-transmitting substrate (62)(see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 5, Ogawa and Li teach Ogawa discloses the dimming window according to claim 4, wherein the first reflective film (62; lines 285-302) is located on a side of the second light-transmitting substrate (62), the side of the second light-transmitting substrate (62) is close to the third light-transmitting substrate (16)(see fig. 6); and/or the first reflective film (62; lines 285-302) is located on a side of the second light-transmitting substrate (62) close to the first light-transmitting substrate (1 8)(see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 6, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 4, wherein the first reflective film (62; lines 285-302) is located on a side of the second light-transmitting substrate (62) close to the third light-transmitting substrate (16)(see fig. 6); and/or the first reflective film (16; lines 285-302) is located on a side of the third light-transmitting substrate (16) close to the second light-transmitting substrate (62)(see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 7, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 4, wherein the thickness of the first chamber (left chamber) is a distance in a first direction between a surface of the first light-transmitting substrate (18) close to the second light-transmitting substrate (62) and a surface of the second light-transmitting substrate (62) close to the first light-transmitting substrate (18)(see fig. 6); the thickness of the second chamber (right chamber) is a distance in the first direction between a surface of the third light-transmitting substrate (16) close to the second light-transmitting substrate (62) and a surface of the second light-transmitting substrate (62) close to the third light-transmitting substrate (16)(see fig. 6); the first direction is a direction perpendicular to a surface of the first light-transmitting substrate (18)(see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 13, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim l, wherein the dimming structure (14) is bonded to a surface of the light-transmitting substrate (18) of the first chamber (left chamber) through a bonding layer (36a).
Regarding claim 15, Ogawa discloses a method for manufacturing a dimming window
(fig. 6), comprising: forming at least two chambers (left, right chambers; fig. 6) arranged in a stack (See fig. 6), each of the chambers comprising two light-transmitting substrates (1 8, 62, 16) arranged opposite to each other (see fig. 6), the at least two chambers comprising a first chamber (left chamber) and a second chamber (right chamber); forming a dimming structure (14) in the first chamber (left chamber), and forming a first reflective film (16/62/18; lines 285-302) in the first chamber (left chamber) and/or the second chamber.
However, Ogawa does not explicitly disclose wherein the thickness of the second chamber is greater than the thickness of the first chamber, the thickness of the chamber is a distance between two opposite surfaces of the two light-transmitting substrates of the chamber, wherein the thickness of the second chamber is 6-20mm.
Li teaches wherein the thickness of the second chamber (chamber between 11, 21; fig.
6), is greater than the thickness of the first chamber (chamber between 10, 21; fig. 6), the thickness of the chamber (chambers 11, 21; 10, 21) is a distance between two opposite surfaces of the two light-transmitting substrates (fig. 6) of the chamber (chambers 11, 21; 10, 21), wherein the thickness of the second chamber (chamber 11, 21) is 6-20mm (distance between the first reflective film 13 and the second reflective film 15 ranges 10mm-l 4mm; fig. 6; (0069]) for the purpose of providing an arrangement that protect the dimming component sand is more uniform and reduces the problems such as cracking or black spots ((0065]).
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 dimming window of Ogawa to include the structure of Li for the purpose of providing an arrangement that protect the dimming component sand is more uniform and reduces the problems such as cracking or black spots ([0065]).
Regarding claim 19, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 4, wherein a spacer (20, 26) is provided between the first light-transmitting substrate (18) and the second light-transmitting substrate (62) to maintain the spacing between the first light-transmitting substrate (18) and the second light-transmitting substrate (62)(see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 20, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 4, wherein a spacer (20, 26) is disposed between the third light-transmitting substrate (16) and the second light-transmitting substrate (62) to maintain the spacing between the third light-transmitting substrate (16) and the second light-transmitting substrate (62)(see fig. 6).
Claims 2, 9-11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ogawa WO2016043164Al in view of Li CN215895169 in view of Houx US20180307111A1.
Regarding claim 2, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 1, wherein the dimming structure (14) comprises a dye liquid crystal dimming layer (32), the dye liquid crystal dimming layer (32) comprises a first substrate (top 34), a second substrate (bottom 34) arranged opposite to each other (see fig. 6) and a dye liquid crystal layer (32) provided between the first substrate (top 34) and the second substrate (bottom 34)(see fig. 6), the dye liquid crystal layer (32) comprises liquid crystal molecules and dye molecules, and the liquid crystal molecules are used for driving rotation of the dye molecules under action of an electric field generated between the first substrate (top 34) and the second substrate (bottom 34) to control the transmittance of light (lines 166-171).
However, Ogawa and Li do not explicitly disclose the liquid crystal being a dye liquid crystal dimming layer.
Houx discloses a dimming structure in which the optically active material is a dye liquid crystal dimming layer ([0031]) for the purposes of selectively orienting the liquid crystal molecules ([00311).
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 dimming structure of Ogawa to include the dye liquid crystal dimming layer of Houx for the purposes of selectively orienting the liquid crystal molecules ([00311).
Regarding claim 9, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim l , however does not explicitly disclose wherein a frame sealing structure is provided between two oppositely arranged light-transmitting substrates within each of the chambers, the frame sealing structure comprises a sealing structure and a spacer, and a hollow structure having an air tightness is formed by bonding the sealing structure, the sealing structure comprising at least two layers of sealant.
Houx teaches wherein a frame sealing structure (18) is provided between two oppositely arranged light-transmitting substrates (14, 26) within each of the chambers (20)(see fig. 1), the frame sealing structure (18) comprises a sealing structure ([0056]) and a spacer (1 8), and a hollow structure (20) having an air tightness is formed by bonding the sealing structure ([0056]), the sealing structure ([0056]) comprising at least two layers of sealant (first, second beads of sealant; [0056]) for the purpose of sealing the chambers ([0056]).
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 dimming structure of Ogawa to include the sealing structure of Houx for the purpose of sealing the chambers ([0056]).
Regarding claim 10, Ogawa, Li and Houx teach the dimming window according to claim 9, Ogawa teaches wherein within the first chamber (left chamber), a distance between an edge of the dimming structure (14) and a side of the frame sealing structure (26) close to the dimming structure is 0.5-5 mm.
However, Ogawa does not explicitly disclose the distance between 0.5-5 mm. In cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff 919 F.2d 1575,
1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
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 distance between the dimming structure and sealing structure for the purpose of securing the first chamber.
Regarding claim 11, Ogawa, Li and Houx teach the dimming window according to claim 9, Houx further teaches wherein the chambers are filled with argon ([0058]).
Regarding claim 18, Ogawa, Li and Houx teaches the dimming window according to claim 9, Houx further teaches wherein the sealing structure (18) comprises at least a first sealant and a second sealant (first, second beads of sealant; [0056]), the first sealant is located between the spacer (18) and a light-transmitting substrate (14), and the second sealant is located on a side of the spacer (18) away from the dimming structure (16-18)(see fig. l).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ogawa WO2016043164Al in view of Houx US20180307111A1 further in view of Chi US 20200363666 A1.
Regarding claim 3, Ogawa and Houx teach the dimming window according to claim 2, however do not teach wherein the dye liquid crystal layer comprises a first dye liquid crystal layer and a second dye liquid crystal layer, the first dye liquid crystal layer and the second dye liquid crystal layer being bonded together by a bonding layer.
PNG
media_image1.png
1
1
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chi discloses in fig 5 the dye liquid crystal layer comprises a first dye liquid crystal layer (52) and a second dye liquid crystal layer (50), the first dye liquid crystal layer and the second dye liquid crystal layer being bonded together by a bonding layer (70) for the purpose of having enlarged adjustable range between the high transmission state and the low transmission.
PNG
media_image1.png
1
1
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[0005]
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 dye liquid crystal layer of Houx to include the dye liquid crystal of Chi for the purpose of having enlarged adjustable range between the high
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa WO2016043164Al in view of Li CN215895169 in view of Houx US20180307111A1 further in view of Neyts US 20230194946 A1.
Regarding claim 12, Ogawa, Li and Houx teach the dimming window according to claim 9, however do not teach wherein the sealing structure comprises two layers of sealant, wherein the sealant at the side away from the dimming structure is a silicone adhesive, a polyurethane adhesive or a polysulfide adhesive; the sealant at the side close to the dimming structure is a hot-melt butyl adhesive or a polyisobutylene adhesive.
Neyts teaches the sealing structure (94 spacer sealant) comprises two layers of sealant [0140], wherein the sealant (94 spacer sealant) at the side away from the dimming structure is a silicone adhesive, a polyurethane adhesive or a polysulfide adhesive [0140]; the sealant (94 spacer sealant) at the side close to the dimming structure is a hot-melt butyl adhesive or a polyisobutylene adhesive [0140] for the purpose of properly sealing the structure to prevent contamination.
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 sealant Houx to include the sealant of Neyts for the purpose for the purpose of properly sealing the structure to prevent contamination.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa WO2016043164Al in view of Li CN215895169 in view of Sadakane US 20190299752 A1.
Regarding claim 14, Ogawa and Li teach the dimming window according to claim 4, wherein the first light-transmitting substrate (18) has a sandwich structure of tempered glass, a PVB layer and tempered glass (lines 148-165), however does not explicitly disclose a blocking ratio of thePVB layer to light with a wavelength of less than or equal to 400 nm is greater than or equal to 99.9%; and/or the thickness of the PVB layer is not less than 0.8 mm.
Sadakane teaches [0079] the thickness of the PVB (PVB) layer is not less than 0.8 mm ( thickness of 0.83 mm) for the purpose of strengthening a substate.
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 PVB of Ogawa to include the thickness of the PVB of Sadakane for the purpose of strengthening a substate.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AGNES DOBROWOLSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-7650. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7 am -11am.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571)272-9791. 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.
/AGNES DOBROWOLSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 2871
/JENNIFER D. CARRUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2871