Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/284,112

COLORED SPECTACLE LENS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 26, 2023
Examiner
LEI, JIE
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hoya Lens Thailand Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
641 granted / 887 resolved
+4.3% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
933
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.0%
-16.0% vs TC avg
§112
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 887 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 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 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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/20/2023 and 3/24/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner. Specification Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Claim 1 - a substrate, an antifogging layer and an intermediate layer. 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 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. Claim 8 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 8, cited term of “…an antifogging layer composition containing the following components (A) to (D)” (line 2-3) is vague and renders the claims indefinite, as component (D) is not specified in the claim. Therefore proper amendments are required in order to clarify the scopes of the claims and overcome the rejections. 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 of this title, 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 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyuki et al (WO 2018105593, English translation attached). Regarding Claim 1, Hiroyuki teaches a colored spectacle lens comprising (abstract; fig. 5 and ¶[0090], line 1-2, used for sunglasses, goggles, corrective eyeglass lenses): a substrate (X) containing a colorant (fig. 5, 32, 14a, 12; ¶[0062], line 1-9, The thermoplastic resin layer 32 may also contain conventionally known additives as appropriate, and may also contain an ultraviolet absorber. It is also possible to include a dye that absorbs a specific wavelength in the visible light range);and an intermediate layer (Y) (fig. 5, 14b) between the substrate (X) (fig. 5, 32, 14a and 12) and the water- absorbent antifogging layer (Z) (see below). But Hiroyuki in the embodiment of fig. 5 does not specifically disclose that a water-absorbent antifogging layer (Z) present on at least one surface side of the substrate (X). However, Hiroyuki also teaches that wherein a water-absorbent antifogging layer (Z) present on at least one surface side of the substrate (X) (¶[0059], line 1-3, a coating layer, an anti-fogging layer, an anti-fouling layer, a water-repellent layer, etc., as described below, may be provided on at least one surface of the first protective layer 14a and the second protective layer 14b of the lens 10a as needed.---that is, the antifogging layer on 14b, and 14b is between the antifogging layer and the substrate; ¶[0088], line 1-16; On the coating layer, an anti-fogging layer, an anti-fouling layer, and a water-repellent layer may be formed as needed; anti-fogging and anti-fouling treatment methods include covering the surface with a surfactant, adding a hydrophilic film to the surface to make it water-absorbent,….). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of fig. 5 of Hiroyuki to have the anti-fogging layer to present on at least one surface side of the substrate (X) for a purpose to provide a lens with excellent appearance in which differences in hue and color shading of the lens are suppressed (¶[0010], line 1-9). Regarding Claim 2, Hiroyuki teaches the spectacle lens according to claim 1, wherein a difference (IY - IZ) between an indentation hardness IY of the intermediate layer (Y) at a load of 100 mgf and an indentation hardness IZ of the water-absorbent antifogging layer (Z) at a load of 100 mgf is more than 0 (¶[0020], line 1-3, the thermoplastic resin contained in the first protective layer 14a and the second protective layer 14b is at least one selected from polycarbonate resin, triacetyl cellulose resin, polyamide resin, polyester resin, and acrylic resin; ¶[0088], line 1-16; anti-fogging layer; forming a water-repellent treatment layer by vapor deposition or sputtering a fluorine-containing silane compound; ---- polycarbonate may have a hardness of 4H; acrylic resin may have a hardness of 5H; fluorine-containing silane may have a hardness of 3H, so a difference between hardness of the intermediate layer (Y) and the antifogging layer is more than 0). Regarding Claim 3, Hiroyuki teaches the spectacle lens according to claim 1, the spectacle lens according to wherein a ratio (IY/IZ) of the indentation hardness IY to the indentation hardness IZ is 1.1 or more (see above, in case of the intermediate layer (Y) 14b of polycarbonate (hardness 4H), and antifogging layer of fluorine-containing silane (hardness 3H); ratio (IY/IZ) = 1.33). Regarding Claim 4, Hiroyuki teaches the colored spectacle lens according to claim 1, wherein the substrate (X) and the intermediate layer (Y) are in direct contact with each other (fig. 5, (32, 14a 12)--substrate and 14b) Regarding Claim 5, Hiroyuki teaches the colored spectacle lens according to claim 1, wherein the intermediate layer (Y) and the water-absorbent antifogging layer (Z) are in direct contact with each other (¶[0059], line 1-3, a coating layer, an anti-fogging layer, an anti-fouling layer, a water-repellent layer, etc., as described below, may be provided on at least one surface of the first protective layer 14a and the second protective layer 14b of the lens 10a as needed.---that is, the antifogging layer on top of 14b in fig. 5). Regarding Claim 6, Hiroyuki teaches the colored spectacle lens according to claim 1, wherein an optical film thickness of the intermediate layer (Y) in light having a wavelength of 450 to 650 nm is 0.2λ to 0.3λ (fig. 5, 14a, 12, 14b,-- 14a, 12, 14b have about same thickness; ¶[0016], line 1-3, The thickness of the polarizing layer 12 is about 10 to 500 µm; --14b may have a thickness same as 12 about 10 µm; ¶[0019], line 1-5, The thickness of the first protective layer 14a and the second protective layer 14b may be the same or different, but is generally about 50 to 1000 µm, ---further, it has been held that where 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, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955)). Regarding Claim 7, Hiroyuki teaches the colored spectacle lens according to claim 1, wherein the intermediate layer (Y) is a cured product of a composition containing a thermosetting resin (¶[0020], line 1-3, the thermoplastic resin contained in the first protective layer 14a and the second protective layer 14b is at least one selected from polycarbonate resin, triacetyl cellulose resin, polyamide resin, polyester resin, and acrylic resin). Regarding Claim 9, Hiroyuki teaches the spectacle lens according to claim 1, wherein the water-absorbent antifogging layer (Z) is an outermost layer (¶[0059], line 1-3, a coating layer, an anti-fogging layer, an anti-fouling layer, a water-repellent layer, etc., as described below, may be provided on at least one surface of the first protective layer 14a and the second protective layer 14b of the lens 10a as needed.---that is, the antifogging layer on 14b of fig. 5). Examiner’s Note Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Jie Lei whose telephone number is (571) 272 7231. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 8:00 am to 5:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by the telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Thomas Pham can be reached on (571) 272 3689.The Fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is (571) 273 8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published application may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000. /JIE LEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 26, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601948
ANGLED BUS BAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601942
ANTI-REFLECTIVE FILM-ATTACHED TRANSPARENT SUBSTRATE AND IMAGE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596239
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596287
VISIBLE LIGHT MODULATION DEVICE AND OPTICAL ENGINE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588810
ARRANGEMENT AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING EYE LENGTHS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+17.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 887 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month