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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 5 are objected to because of informalities.
Claims 3 and 5 lack proper punctuation in that they do not end with a period (Claim 3 ends with a semicolon, and Claim 5 does not end with any punctuation). Each claim must begin with a capital letter and end with a period, and periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. See MPEP § 608.01(m), citing Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2d 1211 (D.D.C. 1995).
Claim 11 recites a “first top coat later” of the first layer stack, and a “first top coat later” of the second layer stack. It is believed that the word “later” was intended to be “layer”, such that these phrases would recite: “first top coat layer” (or “first top coat layer” and “second top coat layer” based on the Office’s interpretation of Claim 11 regarding the 35 USC 112(b) rejection explained below).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 11-15 are 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.
Claim 11 recites the phrase: “a first top coat later [presumed to be ‘layer’] atop the first bottom coat layer” with respect to the “second layer stack”. However, a “first top coat layer” and “first bottom coat layer” are already recited with respect to the “first layer stack”. Thus, it is unclear whether these layers are intended to refer to the earlier-recited layers or are intended to be different layers. For examination, this phrase will be treated as: “a second top coat layer atop the second bottom coat layer”.
Claims 12-15 inherit the deficiencies of Claim 11.
Claims 13 and 14 recite “a first top coat layer” and “a second top coat layer”, respectively. However, these layers are already recited in Claim 11 [as best understood] as existing separately from the claimed first and second enhanced transmission/visibility layers. Yet in Claims 13 and 14, these layers are recited as being part of the claimed first and second enhanced transmission/visibility layers, respectively, thus contradicting the requirements of Claim 11. For examination, the claimed “first top coat layer” and “second top coat layer” of Claims 13 and 14 will be presumed to be the same layers as those recited in Claim 11 (and thus, the claim language relating to these layers should be removed from Claims 13 and 14, or other clarifying amendment(s) should be made if the Office’s understanding is incorrect).
Claims 14 and 15 inherit the deficiencies of Claim 13. Claim 15 inherits the deficiencies of Claim 14.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hart et al., US 2018/0321425 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Hart discloses: A component having a decorative metallic finish in the visible wavelength range with high transmission in the infrared (IR) wavelength range, the component comprising (the Office notes that the term “comprising” is an open-ended transitional phrase which permits additional elements or features):
a substrate defining a front side and a back side (substrate 110 has an upper side and a lower side; paragraph [0277] and FIG. 7 of Hart); and
a layer stack atop the front side of the substrate (optical coating 120 is atop the upper side of the substrate 110; FIG. 7 of Hart);
the layer stack comprising:
a bottom coat layer atop the substrate (lower interference stack 130 is atop substrate 110; FIG. 7 of Hart);
a silicon (Si) layer atop the bottom coat layer (scratch resistant layer 150 is atop lower interference stack 130 and may comprise Si [silicon]; paragraph [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart);
one or more silicon dioxide (SiO2) layers atop the Si layer (upper interference stack 130 is atop scratch resistant layer 150 and may comprise a plurality of periods such that a low RI [refractive index] layer 130A [“L” layer] and a high RI [refractive index] layer 130B [“H” layer] alternate, e.g., in a pattern of L / H / L / H, wherein a first layer of the interference stack may be an L layer, and wherein a suitable material for use in the low RI layer is SiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart);
one or more titanium dioxide (TiO2) layers atop and/or between the one or more SiO2 layers (a second layer of the upper interference stack 130 may be an H layer 130B, wherein a suitable material for use in the high RI layer is TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart); and
a top coat layer atop a top one of the one or more TiO2 layers (an uppermost layer of upper interference stack 130 may be a high RI [refractive index] layer 130B [“H” layer; TiO2], wherein a capping layer 131 is atop such uppermost layer of the upper interference stack 130; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart).
Regarding Claim 2, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 1 and further discloses: wherein the layer stack comprises only one SiO2 layer atop the Si layer and only one TiO2 layer atop the SiO2 layer (in contrast to a plurality of periods for the interference stack, the interference stack may comprise a low RI layer, and a high RI layer; see paragraphs [0020]-[0022] of Hart, but see especially paragraph [0020] in contrast with paragraphs [0021] and [0022] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 3, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 1 and further discloses: wherein: the one or more SiO2 layers comprise first and second SiO2 layers and the one or more TiO2 layers comprise first and second TiO2 layers (interference stack 130 may comprise a pattern of L / H / L / H, and thus may comprise SiO2 / TiO2 / SiO2 / TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0263], [0267] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 4, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 3 and further discloses: wherein: the first SiO2 layer is atop the Si layer; the first TiO2 layer is atop the first SiO2 layer; the second SiO2 layer is atop the first TiO2 layer; and a second TiO2 layer atop the second SiO2 layer (interference stack 130 may comprise a pattern of L / H / L / H, and thus may comprise SiO2 / TiO2 / SiO2 / TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0263], [0267] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 5, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 4 and further discloses: wherein the component defines (note that the Office is interpreting the word “defines” as “has a”) transmission greater than 87% at a 940 nanometer wavelength (the article 100 of Hart has a same physical structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention, and thus is presumed to have the same optical characteristics, i.e., same behavior of light passing through it, e.g., transmission and reflectance; see paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, and see MPEP § 2112.01 Sections I and II, and MPEP § 2111.04 Section I; the Office further notes that optical characteristics such as specific percentages of reflectance or transmittance are typical goals of any enhanced transmission / visibility layer or decorative article, e.g., anti-reflective multi-layer or color-shifting surface, and thus cannot form the basis of an invention, because it is simply stating a desired outcome rather describing a physical structure and/or chemical composition and/or arrangement of parts which is new and non-obvious).
Regarding Claim 6, Hart discloses: A component having a decorative metallic finish in the visible wavelength range with high transmission in the infrared (IR) wavelength range, the component comprising (the Office notes that the term “comprising” is an open-ended transitional phrase which permits additional elements or features):
a substrate defining a front side and a back side (substrate 110, as depicted in FIG. 7 of Hart, has a lower side and an upper side, wherein the lower side may be characterized as the claimed “front side” and the upper side may be characterized as the claimed “back side”; paragraph [0277] and FIG. 7 of Hart; the Office notes that without further definition or distinction, the claimed “front side” and “back side” are interchangeable); and
a layer stack below the back side of the substrate (if the article 100 of Hart, as shown in FIG. 7, is flipped over, i.e., rotated 180 degrees, then all layers at an upper side of substrate 110 are “below” the “back” side of the substrate 110, wherein optical coating 120 is thus below the back side of the substrate 110; see FIGS. 1, 7 of Hart; see also rotated FIG. 7 of Hart provided below for Applicant’s convenience; however, see also paragraph [0258] of Hart stating that optical coating 120 may be disposed on a second opposing major surface 114 [i.e., lower surface as depicted in FIG. 7] in addition to or instead of being disposed on a first opposing major surface 112 [i.e., upper surface as depicted in FIG. 7]);
the layer stack comprising:
a bottom coat layer below the substrate (interference stack 130 adjacent to substrate 110 is below substrate 110; see rotated FIG. 7 of Hart shown below);
a silicon (Si) layer below the bottom coat layer (scratch resistant layer 150 is below the interference stack 130 [adjacent to substrate 110] and may comprise Si [silicon]; paragraph [0278] and rotated FIG. 7 of Hart shown below);
one or more silicon dioxide (SiO2) layers below the Si layer (interference stack 130 distanced apart from substrate 110 is below scratch resistant layer 150 and may comprise a plurality of periods such that a low RI [refractive index] layer 130A [“L” layer] and a high RI [refractive index] layer 130B [“H” layer] alternate, e.g., in a pattern of L / H / L / H, wherein a first layer of the interference stack [adjacent to scratch resistant layer 150] may be an L layer, and wherein a suitable material for use in the low RI layer is SiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and rotated FIG. 7 of Hart shown below);
one or more titanium dioxide (TiO2) layers below and/or between the one or more SiO2 layers (a second layer of the interference stack 130 distanced apart from the substrate 110 may be an H layer 130B, wherein a suitable material for use in the high RI layer is TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and rotated FIG. 7 of Hart shown below); and
a top coat layer atop a bottom one of the one or more TiO2 layers (a lowermost layer of the interference stack 130 distanced apart from the substrate 110 may be a high RI [refractive index] layer 130B [“H” layer; TiO2], wherein a capping layer 131 is atop such lowermost layer of the interference stack 130; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and rotated FIG. 7 of Hart shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
418
434
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 6 and further discloses: wherein the layer stack comprises only one SiO2 layer below the Si layer and only one TiO2 layer below the SiO2 layer (in contrast to a plurality of periods for the interference stack, the interference stack may comprise a low RI layer, and a high RI layer; see paragraphs [0020]-[0022] of Hart, but see especially paragraph [0020] in contrast with paragraphs [0021] and [0022] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 8, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 6 and further discloses: wherein the one or more SiO2 layers comprise first and second SiO2 layers and the one or more TiO2 layers comprise first and second TiO2 layers (interference stack 130 may comprise a pattern of L / H / L / H, and thus may comprise SiO2 / TiO2 / SiO2 / TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0263], [0267] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 9, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 8 and further discloses: wherein: the first SiO2 layer is below the Si layer; the first TiO2 layer is below the first SiO2 layer; the second SiO2 layer is below the first TiO2 layer; and a second TiO2 layer below the second SiO2 layer (interference stack 130 may comprise a pattern of L / H / L / H, and thus may comprise SiO2 / TiO2 / SiO2 / TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0263], [0267] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 10, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 9 and further discloses: wherein the component defines (note that the Office is interpreting the word “defines” as “has”) a high glass side reflectance (Rg) value thereby improving aesthetics and/or performance for an automotive front grille application (the article 100 of Hart has a same physical structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention, and thus is presumed to have the same optical characteristics, i.e., same behavior of light passing through it, e.g., transmission and reflectance; see paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, and see MPEP § 2112.01 Sections I and II, and MPEP § 2111.04 Section I; the Office further notes that optical characteristics such as specific percentages of reflectance or transmittance are typical goals of any enhanced transmission / visibility layer or decorative article, e.g., anti-reflective multi-layer or color-shifting surface, and thus cannot form the basis of an invention, because it is simply stating a desired outcome rather describing a physical structure and/or chemical composition and/or arrangement of parts which is new and non-obvious).
Regarding Claim 11, as best understood, Hart discloses: A component having a decorative metallic finish in the visible wavelength range with high transmission in the infrared (IR) wavelength range, the component comprising (the Office notes that the term “comprising” is an open-ended transitional phrase which permits additional elements or features):
a substrate defining a front side and a back side (substrate 110 has an upper side and a lower side; paragraph [0277] and FIG. 7 of Hart);
a second layer stack atop the substrate (optical coating 120 is atop the upper side of the substrate 110; FIG. 7 of Hart);
the second layer stack comprising:
a second bottom coat layer atop the substrate (lower interference stack 130 is atop substrate 110; FIG. 7 of Hart);
a second enhanced transmission/visibility layer atop the bottom coat layer (scratch resistant layer 150 is atop lower interference stack 130, and upper interference stack 130 is atop scratch resistant layer 150; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart); and
a first top coat later atop the first bottom coat layer (capping layer 131 is atop such uppermost layer of the upper interference stack 130; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart);
a first layer stack below the back side of the substrate, the first layer stack comprising: a first bottom coat layer below the substrate; a first enhanced transmission/visibility layer below the bottom coat layer; and a first top coat later below the first bottom coat layer (optical coating 120 may be disposed on both upper and lower surfaces of substrate 110; paragraphs [0244]-[0246], [0258] and FIGS. 1, 7 of Hart).
Regarding Claim 12, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 11 and further discloses: wherein the component does not include a silicon or silicon-based layer (substrate 110 may comprise polycarbonate, scratch resistant layer 150 may comprise titanium oxynitride [TiOxNy], the low and high refractive index layers of interference stack 130 may comprise magnesium fluoride [MgF2] and niobium oxide [Nb2O5], respectively, and the capping layer 131 may comprise magnesium fluoride [MgF2] or aluminum nitride [AlN], and thus the layers of the article 100 of Hart may each have compositions which do not include silicon or a silicon-based layer; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278], [0320] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0264], [0266], [0267], [0278], [0320] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 13, as best understood, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 11 and further discloses: wherein the first enhanced transmission visibility layer comprises, from top to bottom: a first base coat layer; a first titanium dioxide (TiO2) layer; a first silicon dioxide (SiO2) layer; a second TiO2 layer; a second SiO2 layer; and a first top coat layer (scratch resistant layer 150 and interference stack 130 are identified in the rejection of Claim 11 above as corresponding to the claimed first or second enhanced transmission visibility layer, wherein interference stack 130 may comprise a pattern of L / H / L / H [or the reverse of this and/or further repeated pairs of layers], and thus may comprise SiO2 / TiO2 / SiO2 / TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0263], [0267] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 14, as best understood, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 13 and further discloses: wherein the second enhanced transmission visibility layer comprises, from top to bottom: a second base coat layer; a third TiO2 layer; a third SiO2 layer; a fourth TiO2 layer; a fourth SiO2 layer; and a second top coat layer (scratch resistant layer 150 and interference stack 130 are identified in the rejection of Claim 11 above as corresponding to the claimed first or second enhanced transmission visibility layer, wherein interference stack 130 may comprise a pattern of L / H / L / H [or the reverse of this and/or further repeated pairs of layers], and thus may comprise SiO2 / TiO2 / SiO2 / TiO2; paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, but see especially paragraphs [0263], [0267] of Hart).
Regarding Claim 15, Hart discloses the limitations of Claim 14 and further discloses: wherein the component defines (note that the Office is interpreting the word “defines” as “has a”) transmission greater than or equal to 90% at a 940 nanometer wavelength (the article 100 of Hart has a same physical structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention, and thus is presumed to have the same optical characteristics, i.e., same behavior of light passing through it, e.g., transmission and reflectance; see paragraphs [0020]-[0022], [0262]-[0267], [0277], [0278] and FIG. 7 of Hart, and see MPEP § 2112.01 Sections I and II, and MPEP § 2111.04 Section I; the Office further notes that optical characteristics such as specific percentages of reflectance or transmittance are typical goals of any enhanced transmission / visibility layer or decorative article, e.g., anti-reflective multi-layer or color-shifting surface, and thus cannot form the basis of an invention, because it is simply stating a desired outcome rather describing a physical structure and/or chemical composition and/or arrangement of parts which is new and non-obvious).
Examiner Note – Consider Entirety of Reference
Although various text and figures of the cited reference have been specifically cited in this Office Action to show disclosures and teachings which correspond to specific claim language, Applicant is advised to consider the complete disclosure of the reference, including portions which have not been specifically cited by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN S DUNNING whose telephone number is 571-272-4879. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10:30AM to 7:00PM Eastern Time Zone. 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, BUMSUK WON can be reached at 571-272-2713. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding 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 applications 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 Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RYAN S DUNNING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872