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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 102, and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8 and 17-20 in the reply filed on 10 June 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10 June 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) submitted 28 August 2023(x3) and 30 May 2025 have been considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraphs [0075] and [0085]-[0087], the claims are referred to within the body of the disclosure. The claims should not be referred to in the body of the disclosure.
In paragraph [0075] recites “claims 1 to 10” appears to be a typographical error for “paragraphs 1 to 10”.
In paragraph [0085] recites “claims 18 to 20” appears to be a typographical error for “paragraphs 18 to 20”.
In paragraph [0086] recites “claims 18 to 21” appears to be a typographical error for “paragraphs 18 to 211”.
In paragraph [0087] recites “claims 18 to 22” appears to be a typographical error for “paragraphs 18 to 22”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-8 and 17-20 comprise numerical ranges. The ranges are read in light of the specification. As such the claims are read in terms of paragraph [0013] which reads:
“[00013] Unless otherwise indicated, all numbers expressing quantities of ingredients, chemical and molecular properties, reaction conditions, and so forth used in the specification and claims are to be understood as being modified in all instances by the term “about.” Accordingly, unless indicated to the contrary, the numerical parameters set forth in the specification and attached claims are approximations that may vary depending upon the desired properties sought to be obtained by the present exemplary embodiments. At the very least each numerical parameter should be construed in light of the number of significant digits and ordinary rounding approaches.”
The paragraph is read that each range is read as modified by the term “about”. Hence, a range, such as “4-25” would be interpreted as “about 4 to about 25”. The claims will be treated in the broadest meaning which would be the interpretation using “about” to modify the claims. Therefore, the numerical ranges of the claims will be read in view of the ranges as modified by the term “about”. Since the specification does don’t define the value of “about”, the term about is being considered up to ±20% of the value. The ranges of the instant claims will be considered anticipated or obvious if the examples or ranges of the prior art falls within ±20% of the endpoints. There is no consistent value for which the term “about” used in the prior art related to glass compositions and glasses as shown by the specifications of: U.S. Patent Application Publications such as: US 2021/0025984 A1, US 2018/0099487 A1, US 2015/0344352 A1, US 2015/0344352 A1, US 2010/395134 A1, US 2019/0177212 A1, US 2010/221727 A1, US 2010/206687 A1, US 2020/002216 A1, US 2018/0319700 A1, and US 2003/0216242 A1. In the listed specification the term “about” is defined as anywhere from ±0.2% of the value up to ±30% or even 50% of the endpoint values.
In claims 1 and 17, the claims recite “wherein a glass fiber formed from the glass composition has a sonic fiber elastic modulus of at least 94.5 GPa.” Since claims 1 and 17 are drawn to a glass composition, not a glass fiber, the limitation related to the elastic modulus of the fiber is considered an intended use of the glass composition.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: minor typographical errors.
Claims 1 and 17 recite “a DT of at least 10 °C”, the term “DT” is not defined in the claims. “DT” is defined in paragraph [0022] as the difference between the fiberizing temperature and the liquidus temperature. The definition should be included in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) or second paragraph
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 1-8 and 17-20 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.
Claims 1, 7, 8, and 17-20 recite several limitations that recite a range in the format of “between X and Y”. This renders the claim indefinite since it is not clear if the claim limits the range to the values between the numbers or if the range is meant to include the recited endpoints of the range. The specification is not clear to the definition of the term “between”. In several places of specification, specifically, in paragraph [0019], the specification recites “including all endpoints and subranges therebetween.” This appears to differentiate the endpoints from the values between the endpoints. For example, claim 1 recites “a ratio R1 (R1 = Y2O3/La2O3) between 2 and 4”. Does that include the value 2 and 4? Numerically, does between 2 and 4 mean a) 2≥R1≤4 or b) 2>R1<4? This is also true for ranges pertaining to the amounts of R1, R2, R3, fiberizing temperature, and liquidus temperature as recited in claims 1, 7, 8, and 17-20. The limitations utilizing the terminology “between” will be examined as where the range does not include the endpoints, as shown above 2>R1<4.
As to claims 1-8 and 17-20, as explained in the Claim Interpretation section above, the numerical values in the claims are modified by the term "about", as disclosed in paragraph [0013] of the instant specification. As such the term “about” is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term "about" is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, looking at claim 1 and only the SiO2 component, “50 to 58 % by weight” is read as “about 50 to about 58 % by weight”, since the term “about” is not defined by the specification it is not clear what the range’s endpoints are for SiO2 or what is meant by the term “about”. Does 49.5, 45.0, or even 40.0 read on “about 50” since 49.5 represents ±1% of 50 (or 0.5%), 45 represents ±10% of 50 (or 5.0%), and 40 represents ±20% of 50 (or 10%). When looking at the upper limit of the SiO2 range, how much SiO2 is too much to meet the limitation of “50 to 58 % by weight”? 58.58%, 63.8%, or even 69.6%? (1% of 58, 10% of 58, and 20% of 58, respectively).
Therefore, claims 1-8 and 17-20 are rendered indefinite since the use of the relative term “about” does not allow for one of ordinary skill in the art to reasonably determine the scope of the claims. The claims 1-8 and 17-20 are examined in view of paragraph [0013] and the claim interpretation above where the broadest and reasonable interpretation of “about” is considered ±20% of the value.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al., Chinese Patent Publication CN 111807707 A.
This rejection is over the Chinese Patent Application, CN 111807707 A because this reference qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). However, for convenience, the paragraph numbers of the English language equivalent US Patent Application Publication, US 2022/0306520 A1 will be cited below.
Zhang et al. disclose a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 42-56.8% of SiO2, 15.8-24% of Al2O3, >8-20% of Y2O3, 9.2-18% of MgO, 0.1-6.5% of CaO, 9.5-20% of MgO+CaO, 0.01-1.5% of Na2O, 0-1.5% of K2O, 0-0.7% of li20, 0.01-1.5% of Li2O+Na2O+K2O, 0.01-4% of TiO2, 0.01-1.5% of Fe2O3, 0-3% of SrO, 0-2.9% of La2O3. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically, paragraphs [0043]-[0063]. Zhang et al. disclose that the glass has a modulus of glass of at least 96 GPa. See paragraph [0075]. The compositional ranges of Zhang et al. are sufficiently specific to anticipate the glass composition as recited in claims 17-20. See MPEP 2131.03.
Specifically, as to claim 17, Zhang et al. disclose Example A19 (see Table 1C), which reads on a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 50-58% of SiO2, 18-23% of Al2O3, less than 18% of MgO+CaO, at least 5% of Y2O3+La2O3, a ratio of Y2O3/La2O3 of between 2 and 4, a fiberizing temperature of between 1,200°C and 1,300°C, and a DT of at least 10°C, wherein if the glass composition was in the form of a fiber, it would have a sonic fiber elastic modulus of at least 94.5 GPa , as recited in instant claim 17.
As to claim 18, Zhang et al. disclose Example A19 (see Table 1C), which reads on a glass in terms of weight percentages has a ratio R2, SiO2/(MgO+CaO) of between 3.1 and 3.75, as recited in instant claim 18.
As to claim 19, Zhang et al. disclose Example A19 (see Table 1C), which reads on a glass has a liquidus temperature between 1,150 °C and 1,250 °C as recited in instant claim 19.
As to claim 20, Zhang et al. disclose Example A19 (see Table 1C), which reads on a glass having a fiberizing temperature between 1,210 °C and 1,260 °C, as recited in instant claim 20.
Claims 1-8 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Korwin-Edson, U.S. Patent Application Publication, US 2020/0165159 A1.
Korwin-Edson disclose a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 50-75% of SiO2, 15-25% of Al2O3, 8-15% of MgO, 0-10% of CaO, 10-22% of MgO+CaO, 0-3% of TiO2, 0-1% of Fe2O3, 0-5% of Li2O, 0-2% of Na2O+K2O, 0-1% of Na2O, 0-1% of K2O, 0-1.5% of ZrO2, 0-15% of Y2O3+La2O3+CeO2+Sc2O3, 0-10% of Y2O3, 0-10% of La2O3,, 0-5% of CeO2, 0-5% of Sc2O3, 0-7% of Ta2O5, 0-7% of Ga2O3, 0-2.5% of Nb2O5, 0-2% of V2O5, 0-1% of Sm2O3 and/or Gd2O3, 0-5% of ZnO, and is essentially free of B2O3. See Abstract and the entire specification, specifically, paragraphs [0044]-[000062]. Korwin-Edson disclose that the glass has elastic modulus of at least 88 GPa. See paragraph [0069]. Korwin-Edson disclose that the glass has a density of 2-3 g/cc. See paragraph [0072]. The compositional ranges of Korwin-Edson are sufficiently specific to anticipate the optical glass composition as recited in claims 1-8 and 17-20. See MPEP 2131.03.
Specifically, as to claim 1, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 50-58% of SiO2, 18-23% of Al2O3, less than 18% of CaO+MgO, at least 5% of Y2O3+La2O3, a ratio of Y2O3/La2O3 is between 2 and 4, >1-2% of Li2O, 0-0.1% of Na2O, 0-0.2% of K2O, 0-0.5% of TiO2, a ratio of SiO2/(MgO+CaO) of between 3.1 and 3.75, having a fiberizing temperature less than 1,300°C, a liquidus temperature of at most 1,250 °C, and a DT of at most 10°C, wherein if the glass composition was in the form of a fiber, it would have a sonic fiber elastic modulus of at least 94.5 GPa, as recited in instant claim 1.
As to claim 2, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 4-8% of Y2O3 and 0.5-4% of La2O3, as recited in instant claim 2.
As to claim 3, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 18.3-21.5% of Al2O3, as recited in instant claim 3.
As to claim 4, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass being essentially free of B2O3, as recited in instant claim 4.
As to claim 5, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 1.25-<2% of Li2O, as recited in instant claim 5.
As to claim 6, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass having a fiberizing temperature of less than 1,250°C, as recited in instant claim 5.
As to claim 7, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass having a ratio of SiO2/Al2O3 of between 2.5 and 3, as recited in instant claim 7.
As to claim 8, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass having a ratio Y2O3/La2O3 (R1) of between 2.8 and 3.1, as recited in instant claim 8.
As to claim 17, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass comprising in terms of weight percentages, 50-58% of SiO2, 18-23% of Al2O3, less than 18% of MgO+CaO, at least 5% of Y2O3+La2O3, a ratio of Y2O3/La2O3 of between 2 and 4, a fiberizing temperature of between 1,200°C and 1,300°C, and a DT of at least 10°C, wherein if the glass composition was in the form of a fiber, it would have a sonic fiber elastic modulus of at least 94.5 GPa , as recited in instant claim 17.
As to claim 18, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass in terms of weight percentages has a ratio R2, SiO2/(MgO+CaO) of between 3.1 and 3.75, as recited in instant claim 18.
As to claim 19, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass has a liquidus temperature between 1,150 °C and 1,250 °C as recited in instant claim 19.
As to claim 20, Korwin-Edson disclose Example 48 (see Table 10), which reads on a glass having a fiberizing temperature between 1,210 °C and 1,260 °C, as recited in instant claim 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth A. Bolden whose telephone number is (571)272-1363. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am to 6:30 pm M-F.
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, Amber R. Orlando can be reached at 571-270-3149. 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.
/Elizabeth A. Bolden/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
EAB
23 June 2026
Prosecution Insights