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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim s 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai (JP 2019-094468 A) in view of Kosaka (U.S. Pat. No. 6,448,304). An English-language machine translation of Kawai, which is attached, has been used in setting forth this rejection, and the paragraph numbers referred to herein are those of the translation unless otherwise noted. In paragraph 9 Kawai discloses a coating composition capable of forming a cured film with good anti-fogging performance. In paragraph 87 Kawai discloses that the object to be coated can be eyeglass lenses, meeting the limitations of the substrate of claim 1, and the coated lens comprising the cured anti-fogging film is a spectacle lens as recited in claim 1. In paragraph 13 Kawai discloses that the composition comprises a (meth)acrylic resin, a polyol compound, and a polyfunctional isocyanate compound, corresponding to components (A), (B), and (C) of claim 2. Kawai further discloses in paragraph 13 that the (meth)acrylic resin comprises constituent units derived from monomers (a-1), (a-2), and (a-3), and on pages 5-6 of the original Japanese reference, Kawai discloses that these monomers correspond to the monomers (a-1), (a-2), and (a-3) of claim 2. The differences between Kawai and the currently presented claims are: i) I n paragraph 74 Kawai discloses that the composition can further comprise ultraviolet absorbers, but does not specifically disclose the spectral characteristics of the anti-fogging layer or specific suitable ultraviolet absorbers. ii) Kosaka does not specifically disclose forming the substrate out of a resin. With respect to i), Kosaka, in column 1 lines 17-23, discloses optical materials, specifically plastic lenses , of good UV absorbability for spectacles. In column 3 lines 1-19 Kosaka discloses that the optical material can comprise a benzotriazole compound. When the R′′ group in the benzotriazole compound of Kosaka is a hydrogen atom, the benzotriazole compound meets the limitations of the UV absorber of claim 3 for the case where n1 is 2 or 3. In column 5 lines 21-25 Kosaka discloses specific benzotriazole compounds meeting the limitations of the UV absorber of claim 3. In Figure 1 Kosaka discloses a lens (Example 4, column 12 lines 26-35) having transmittances within the ranges recited in claim 1. The incorporation of the benzotriazole-based UV absorber of Kosaka in the anti-fogging film of Kawai therefore produces a spectacle lens having the spectral characteristics of claim 1 and meeting the structural and compositional limitations of claims 1-3. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the benzotriazole-based UV absorber of Kosaka as the UV absorber in the anti-fogging film of the spectacle lens of Kawai, since Kosaka teaches that it is a suitable UV absorber for use in spectacle lenses. With respect to ii), Kosaka discloses in column 5 lines 46-53 that the lenses can use poly(thio)urethane lenses or polycarbonates as the substrates, meeting the limitations of the substrate made of resin of claim 7. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the lens substrates of Kawai from the resins of Kosaka, since Kosaka teaches that they are suitable substrates for spectacle lenses. Claims 5- 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai in view of Kosaka as applied to claim s 1-3 and 7 above, and further in view of Dalzell (U.S. Pat. No. 5,434,707) . The discussion of Kawai and Kosaka in paragraph 6 above is incorporated here by reference. Kawai and Kosaka disclose a spectacle lens meeting the limitations of claim 1, but do not disclose that the lens is dyed with a colorant. In column 3 lines 24-27 Dalzell discloses plastic light-polarizing lenses, and in the abstract discloses that the lenses are especially suites as sunglass lenses for spectacles. In column 7 lines 9-29 Dalzell further discusses the construction of the lenses, and discloses that colored dyes can be employed, as recited in claim 5, including gray dyes, as recited in claim 6, in order to obtain a lens of desired color. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the dyes of Dalzell in the spectacle lens of Kawai and Kosaka, since Dalzell teaches that they can suitable be included in lenses in order to provide a desired color. Claim s 1- 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai (JP 2019-094468 A) in view of Glöge (U.S. PG Pub. No. 2019/0243161). An English-language machine translation of Kawai, which is attached, has been used in setting forth this rejection, and the paragraph numbers referred to herein are those of the translation unless otherwise noted. In paragraph 9 Kawai discloses a coating composition capable of forming a cured film with good anti-fogging performance. In paragraph 87 Kawai discloses that the object to be coated can be eyeglass lenses, meeting the limitations of the substrate of claim 1, an d the coated lens comprising the cured anti-fogging film is a spectacle lens as recited in claim 1. In paragraph 13 Kawai discloses that the composition comprises a (meth)acrylic resin, a polyol compound, and a polyfunctional isocyanate compound, corresponding to components (A), (B), and (C) of claim 2. Kawai further discloses in paragraph 13 that the (meth)acrylic resin comprises constituent units derived from monomers (a-1), (a-2), and (a-3), and on pages 5-6 of the original Japanese reference, Kawai discloses that these monomers correspond to the monomers (a-1), (a-2), and (a-3) of claim 2. In paragraph 74 Kawai discloses that the composition can further comprise ultraviolet absorbers, but does not specifically disclose the spectral characteristics of the anti-fogging layer or specific suitable ultraviolet absorbers. Glöge , in paragraph 236, discloses that 2,2′,4,4′-tetrahydroxybenzophenone is a suitable UV absorber for spectacle lenses. 2,2′,4,4′-tetrahydroxybenzophenone meets the limitations of the UV absorber of claim 4 for the case where both n2 and n3 are 2. Including the 2,2′,4,4′-tetrahydroxybenzophenone of Glöge as the UV absorber in the anti-fogging film of the spectacle lens of Kawai meets the compositional and structural limitations of claims 1-2 and 4, and since the UV absorber of Glöge meets the limitations of the specific claimed UV absorber, it will lead to an anti-fogging film having the spectral characteristics recited in claim 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the 2,2′,4,4′-tetrahydroxybenzophenone of Glöge as the UV absorber in the anti-fogging film of the spectacle lens of Kawai, since Glöge teaches that it is a suitable UV absorber for use in spectacle lenses. Claims 5 - 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai in view of Kosaka as applied to claim s 1-3 and 7 above, and further in view of Dalzell (U.S. Pat. No. 5,434,707) . The discussion of Kawai and Glöge in paragraph 6 above is incorporated here by reference. Kawai and Glöge disclose a spectacle lens meeting the limitations of claim 1, but do not disclose that the lens is dyed with a colorant, and do not specifically disclose that the lens is made of resin. In column 3 lines 24-27 Dalzell discloses plastic light-polarizing lenses, and in the abstract discloses that the lenses are especially suites as sunglass lenses for spectacles. In column 7 lines 9-29 Dalzell further discusses the construction of the lenses, and discloses that colored dyes can be employed, as recited in claim 5, including gray dyes, as recited in claim 6, in order to obtain a lens of desired color. In column 6 lines 14-47 Dalzell discloses that the lens can include sheets made of resin materials, as recited in claim 7. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the dyes of Dalzell in the spectacle lens of Kawai and Glöge , since Dalzell teaches that they can suitable be included in lenses in order to provide a desired color. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the substrate in the spectacle lens of Kawai and Glöge of the resin materials of Dalzell, since Dalzell teaches that they are suitable materials for forming a spectacle lens, and in column 6 lines 13-18, 27-30, and 32-37 Dalzell teaches that the resins have favorable properties. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JAMES C GOLOBOY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2476 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F, usually about 10:00-6:30 . 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 PREM SINGH can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-6381 . 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. /JAMES C GOLOBOY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771