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 .
Prior art of Record
The prior art made of record in this office action shall be referred to as follows;
U.S. 5,972,233 Becker et al. (‘Becker hereafter),
U.S. 2019/0171164 Bossart et al. (‘Bossart hereafter),
U.S. 3,633,355 Taketoshi Sakata (‘Sakata hereafter),
U.S. 2015/0079760 Lei et al. (‘Lei hereafter),
U.S. 2007/0026205 Anton et al. (‘Anton hereafter),
U.S. 6,501,014 Kubota et al. (‘Kubota hereafter),
U.S. 2004/0247904 Siu Yeung Winston Chan (‘Chan hereafter),
The above references will be referred to hereafter by the names or numbers indicated above.
Claim status:
Claims 10 - 27 are currently being examined.
Claims 1 – 9, 13 - 15 have been canceled.
Claims 12, 24 – 27 are allowed.
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.
Claim 10 – 12, 17 - 27 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “blade-like” in claim 10, in the limitation “forming a blade-pattern design on the metal member at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region,” is unclear.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “blade-like” in claim 10, in the limitation “forming a blade-pattern design on the metal member at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region,” is used by the claim to mean something other than the accepted meaning is ““a dagger or a sword shape.” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. Examiner will examine as best understood until an amendment to clarify the limitation is presented.
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 10, 11, 16 & 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2019/0171164 Bossart et al. (‘Bossart hereafter), and in view of U.S. 5,972,233 Becker et al. (‘Becker hereafter), and in further view, U.S. 3,633,355 Taketoshi Sakata (‘Sakata hereafter).
Regarding Claim[s] 10, ‘Bossart discloses all the claim limitations including: A method for manufacturing a watch component (‘Bossart, Abst, “A method of manufacturing a clock or watch component.”), the method comprising:
for shaping a metal member by shaping a metal material into a watch component shape (‘Bossart. Para 0044, “Thus, the second embodiment described above certainly allows considerable simplification of the method of manufacturing a clock or watch component. It is based on the use of a metallic support for a slice consisting of a micro-machinable material, and on the unexpected finding that it is possible to manufacture a clock or watch component starting from a wafer comprising a single slice of micro-machinable material and a thln metallic lower layer, much thinner than the support in the prior art, which is also made of micro-machlnable material. A person skilled in the art would have had a negative prejudice to such a solution, notably considering that the metal would diffuse in the micro-machinable material, altering its properties. A person skilled in the art would also have a negative prejudice regarding the feasibility of this method of manufacture, as the treatment equipment is generally designed for wafers of a certain rigidity to ensure precision and robustness.” Para 0055, “The micro-machinable material may also be any microstructurable material, sufficiently rigid to be manipulated. Thus, the invention is suitable more generally for manufacturing a clock or watch component consisting of or comprising a material called “material of the component” that can be cut through a mask.” “Moreover, a wafer of this kind may optionally comprise a support in another material, notably a metal or a metal alloy, called material of the support, different than the material of the component and compatible with it, i.e. not affected during etching of the material of the component, such as execution of the etching steps E14, E24 described above.” Teaches metal material that is machinable);
coating a surface of the metal member with a coating material (‘Bossart. Para 0053, “As a variant, the method of manufacturing a clock or watch component may also comprise additional treatment steps, carried out before or after release of the component from the resin and/or from the metallic support, such as thinning of the slice of micro-machinable material or of the component, mechanical or laser-beam reworking, coating, thermal treatment of oxidation, cleaning/degreasing, etc.” Teaches coating)
Except ‘Bossart is silent regarding: coating a surface of the metal member with a coating material having a color different from a material color of the metal member to form a coated region which is coated with the coating material; peeling a part of the coating material to form an exposed region form which the material color of the metal member is exposed, and forming a blade-pattern design at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region.
However, ‘Becker does teach: coating a surface of the metal member with a coating material having a color different from a material color of the metal member to form a coated region which is coated with the coating material (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 42 - 51, “In an optional manufacturing step, as shown by dotted line 48, the photolithographic processes may be reiterated by suitable means and registration and successive layers in certain areas may be modified to build different kinds of images. For example, various color schemes in a particular image may be created by first depositing a material of one color (e.g. gold) in the photoresist coating pattern, removing that photoresist layer, adding another photoresist coating, etching it away in certain areas, and then depositing a different color material (e.g. platinum).”)
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart with coating of metal with a color different from a material color of the metal member as taught by ‘Becker, in order to provide a decorated article (‘Becker, Col. 1, ln 9 – 15).
peeling a part of the coating material to form an exposed region form which the material color of the metal member is exposed (‘Becker, Fig 3, #38 (remove photosensitive coating), Abst, “A method of manufacturing a decorative article, the method including: choosing a non-silicon substrate material which will form the substrate for the decorative article; coating the substrate with a photoresist material; forming a decorative graphic art image pattern in the photoresist coating; transferring the decorative graphic art image pattern in the photoresist coating to the substrate; and removing the photoresist coating.” “Removing the photoresist coating” is understood to be peeling, Col. 4, ln 42 – 51); and
‘Sakata teaches: forming a blade-pattern design on the metal member at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region (‘Sakata, ln Col. 5, ln 47 – 75, “In FIGS. 8 through 12, reference numeral 1 represents a watch case. Numeral 2 represents a plate carrying no hour or minute graduations but only symbols or letters relating to the name of the manufacturer or the number of jewels incorporated or the like. Numeral 3 represents a glass which is made with a material same as that for the glass of the watch shown in FIG. 1. The reverse side of the glass 3 is provided with graduations of hours 4 and graduations of minutes 5 both having an appropriate color or colors. These graduations 4 and 5 in this instant example are coated--at the surfaces remote from the upper face of the glass 3--with a material having a color different from the color or colors of the materials or materials of graduations 4 and 5 themselves. Alternatively, as shown in FIG. 11, the graduations 4 and 5 may each be provided--on their surfaces remote from the upper face of the glass 3--with a layer 12 of a material having an appropriate color different from the color or colors of the material or materials of the graduations and being adhesively attached to said surfaces. The hands generally indicated at 10 of the watch also may each be provided--on the reverse side either locally at the distal end portion or entirely--with a coating of a color material preferably different from the aforesaid color or colors of said surfaces of the graduations 4 and 5. Alternatively, the hands 10 may each be provided with a layer 11 of a material of an appropriate color which preferably is different from the color or colors provided on said surfaces of the graduations and which is adhesively attached to the reverse side either locally as shown in FIG. 12 or entirely on said side.” Fig 12 shows #10 hand as a blade shaped component, Col. 6, ln 1 – 17, “Numeral 13 represents a reflecting mirror plate having a donutlike annular shape and having a mirror face formed on the upper side thereof and being securely mounted on the upper face of the plate 2 . The annular mirror face of this reflecting mirror plate 13 in this example is of an area defined between the extreme distal end of its radius about the center axis of the plate 2 corresponding in position to at least the distal end edges of the graduations 4 and 5 and the proximal end of its radius about the center axis of the plate 2 corresponding in position to at least the proximal end edge of the color material 11 applied to the reverse side of the hand 10. This reflecting mirror plate 13 may be made with an annular metal plate having one of the faces polished to provide a reflecting mirror face, or it may be made with a mirror glass plate. It should be understood, however, that said donutlike reflecting mirror plate 13 may be replaced by a continuous circular or polygonal mirror plate.” Abst “Transparent or translucent watch glasses provided with indications-such as graduations of hours, minutes and the like combined with hands, both said indications and said hands having different colors on the undersides thereof so that a reflective dial face reflects the contrasting color of the undersides to the wearer to prevent parallax reading errors.).
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart with a blade with a coated region as taught by ‘Sakata in order to provide a layer of material of a different color to highlight the watch hand (‘Sakata, Col. 54, ln 47 – 75).
Regarding Claim[s] 11, ‘Bossart discloses all the claim limitations including: A method for manufacturing a watch component (‘Bossart, Abst, “A method of manufacturing a clock or watch component.”), the method comprising:
for shaping a metal member by shaping a metal material into a watch component shape (‘Bossart, Para 0044, “Thus, the second embodiment described above certainly allows considerable simplification of the method of manufacturing a clock or watch component. It is based on the use of a metallic support for a slice consisting of a micro-machinable material, and on the unexpected finding that it is possible to manufacture a clock or watch component starting from a wafer comprising a single slice of micro-machinable material and a thin metallic lower layer, much thinner than the support in the prior art, which is also made of micro-machinable material. A person skilled in the art would have had a negative prejudice to such a solution, notably considering that the metal would diffuse in the micro-machinable material, altering its properties. A person skilled in the art would also have a negative prejudice regarding the feasibility of this method of manufacture, as the treatment equipment is generally designed for wafers of a certain rigidity to ensure precision and robustness.” Para 0055, “The micro-machinable material may also be any microstructurable material, sufficiently rigid to be manipulated. Thus, the invention is suitable more generally for manufacturing a clock or watch component consisting of or comprising a material called “material of the component” that can be cut through a mask.” “Moreover, a wafer of this kind may optionally comprise a support in another material, notably a metal or a metal alloy, called material of the support, different than the material of the component and compatible with it, i.e. not affected during etching of the material of the component, such as execution of the etching steps E14, E24 described above.” Teaches metal material that is machinable);
Except ‘Bossart, is silent regarding: masking a surface of the metal member, with a masking material, the masked surface including an exposed region from which a material color of the metal member is exposed coating an unmasked surface of the metal member with a coating material with a coating material having a color different from a material color of the metal member to form a coated region which is coated with the coating material, forming a blade-pattern design at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region.
However, ‘Becker teaches: masking a surface of the metal member (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 3 – 17, “Next, the decorative graphic art image created, step 34, and rendered in the photoresist material and exposed by various known methodologies to yield either a positive or negative mask of the desired graphic art image pattern, step 34.”, Col. 3, ln 62 – Col. 4, ln 2, “In another embodiment, the transmissive substrate 12b, FIG. 2B, has the imaging layer(s) 22b residing on the bottom of the substrate and also included is a spectrally reflective or refractive layer or layers 24 thereon. Layer 24 may be a dielectric coating of cobalt, for example. A spectrally transmissive or opaque bonding layer 20b bonds all the layers to protective backing 26 (e.g. glass, metal) which is transmissive or opaque.” Col. 2, ln 43, “Transferring the decorative graphic art image pattern to the substrate may include depositing an imaging material such as gold within the image pattern formed in the photosensitive coating. Alternatively, transferring the decorative graphic art image pattern to the substrate may include etching the substrate in the areas of the image pattern formed in the photosensitive coating; or first etching the substrate in areas of the image pattern formed in the photosensitive coating and then depositing an imaging material within the etched areas of the substrate.” Col. 4, ln 42 – 51, “In an optional manufacturing step, as shown by dotted line 48, the photolithographic processes may be reiterated by suitable means and registration and successive layers in certain areas may be modified to build different kinds of images. For example, various color schemes in a particular image may be created by first depositing a material of one color (e.g. gold) in the photoresist coating pattern, removing that photoresist layer, adding another photoresist coating, etching it away in certain areas, and then depositing a different color material ( e.g. platinum).”),
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart with masking a surface of metal as taught by ‘Becker in order to provide a decorated article (‘Becker, Col. 1, ln 9 – 15).
with a masking material, the masked surface including an exposed region from which a material color of the metal member is exposed (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 42 – 51);
coating an unmasked surface of the metal member with a coating material with a coating material having a color different from a material color of the metal member to form a coated region which is coated with the coating material (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 52 – Col. 5, ln 11, “The graphic art image pattern may be a mathematically generated fractal design stored in digital form in a computer memory in a bit map format and that digital data may then be used to imprint a highly detailed dot matrix design onto a photoresist coated substrate disc of a synthetic substrate to be typically deposited in gold, platinum, silver, chromium, aluminum, titanium, zirconia, boron, silicon, chromium, or cobalt using photo-lithographic equipment which is normally used to create patterns of electronic circuitry. Unlike electric circuitry patterns, decorative graphic art image 16, FIG. 1, can be made multi-colored, and usually the individual discrete gold dots of material are not in contact with each other. Moreover, unlike electronic circuitry, various reflective films may be placed over the substrate to provide a visually pleasing effect. Instead of manipulating the flow of electrons, the subject invention manipulates the controlled transmission, reflection or refraction or refraction of photons yielding a visually pleasing intricately designed decorative article without the need for engraving or painting techniques. This novel manufacturing process assures a high rate of production yielding uniform products of a high quality. As seen by the eye, the image may appear on the top of the substrate or the bottom of the substrate and the substrate may be mounted in the jewelry housing either way. Protective layers, reflective layers, refractive layers, and other layers may be added to create a unique image and a unique decorative article.”);
However, ‘Sakata teaches: forming a blade-pattern design at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region (‘Sakata, Col. 54, ln 47 – 75 “The hands generally indicated at 10 of the watch also may each be provided--on the reverse side either locally at the distal end portion or entirely--with a coating of a color material preferably different from the aforesaid color or colors of said surfaces of the graduations 4 and 5. Alternatively, the hands 10 may each be provided with a layer 11 of a material of an appropriate color which preferably is different from the color or colors provided on said surfaces of the graduations and which is adhesively attached to the reverse side either locally as shown in FIG. 12 or entirely on said side.” Fig 12 shows #10 hand as a blade shaped component”);
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart with a blade with a coated region as taught by ‘Sakata in order to provide a layer of material of a different color to highlight the watch hand (‘Sakata, Col. 54, ln 47 – 75). and
removing the masking material (‘Bossart, Para 0010, “For this purpose, the invention is based on a method of manufacturing a clock or watch component, characterized in that it comprises the following steps: [0011] providing a wafer comprising a slice comprising a material of the component, notably silicon, diamond, quartz or ceramic, [0012] optionally first coating the lower surface of said slice with a lower layer, [0013] etching said slice of the wafer starting from its upper surface to form at least one clock or watch component, [0014] revealing at least one clock or watch component, by removing a layer that served as a mask for etching, [0015] and optionally releasing said slice and the at least one etched clock or watch component by removing the lower layer.”).
Regarding Claim[s] 16, ‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata disclose all the claim limitations including: wherein the coated region includes a first coated region and a second coated region,
the second coated region is disposed between the first coated region and the exposed region (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 42 – 51, “In an optional manufacturing step, as shown by dotted line 48, the photolithographic processes may be reiterated by suitable means and registration and successive layers in certain areas may be modified to build different kinds of images. For example, various color schemes in a particular image may be created by first depositing a material of one color (e.g. gold) in the photoresist coating pattern, removing that photoresist layer, adding another photoresist coating, etching it away in certain areas, and then depositing a different color material ( e.g. platinum).” Fig 3, #48 (optional repeat) shows repeating the coating, removing coating for the desired image that will require multiple regions to be coated), and
is formed by peeling a part of the coating material of the coated region (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 42 – 51, “Removing the photoresist coating” is understood to be peeling), and
‘Bossart, is silent regarding: a first removal amount of the coating material to form the second coated region is smaller than a second removal amount of the coating material to form the exposed region.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart, with a first removal amount of the coating material to form the second coated region is smaller than a second removal amount of the coating material to form the exposed region, would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Further, such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim[s] 21, ‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata disclose all the claim limitations including: the coated region includes a first coated region and a second coated region, the second coated region being disposed between the first coated region and the exposed region (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 42 – 51, “In an optional manufacturing step, as shown by dotted line 48, the photolithographic processes may be reiterated by suitable means and registration and successive layers in certain areas may be modified to build different kinds of images. For example, various color schemes in a particular image may be created by first depositing a material of one color (e.g. gold) in the photoresist coating pattern, removing that photoresist layer, adding another photoresist coating, etching it away in certain areas, and then depositing a different color material ( e.g. platinum).” Fig 3, #48 (optional repeat) shows repeating the coating, removing coating for the desired image that will require multiple regions to be coated),
after coating the unmasked surface with the coating material (‘Becker, Col. 4, ln 42 – 51, “Removing the photoresist coating” is understood to be unmasking),
the first coated region is masked with a masking material, and the second coating region is formed by further coating with the coating material (‘Becker, Fig 3 shows the repeating the steps of masking, unmasking and coating).
Claim 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2019/0171164 Bossart et al. (‘Bossart hereafter), and in view of U.S. 5,972,233 Becker et al. (‘Becker hereafter), and in view, U.S. 3,633,355 Taketoshi Sakata (‘Sakata hereafter), and in further view of U.S. 2015/007976 Lei et al. (‘Lei hereafter).
Regarding Claim[s] 17, ‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata disclose all the claim limitations Except is silent regarding: wherein the coating material is removed by laser treatment, the second coated region is formed by irradiating laser light beam with a first intensity of the laser light beam, and the exposed region is formed by irradiating the laser light beam with a second intensity of the laser light beam greater than the first intensity.
However, ‘Lei Para 0010, “The first mask is patterned with a first laser scribing process to provide a patterned first mask with a first plurality of scribe lines exposing regions of the semiconductor wafer between the integrated circuits. Subsequent to patterning the first mask with the first laser scribing process, a second mask is formed above the patterned first mask. The second mask is patterned with a second laser scribing process to provide a patterned second mask with a second plurality of scribe lines exposing the regions of the semiconductor wafer between the integrated circuits.” ‘Lei teaches using the laser to remove masking/ coating, and first and second masked areas. Para 0020, “FIG. 8 is an equation showing the relationship of laser intensity for a given laser as a function of laser pulse energy, laser pulse width, and laser beam radius.” ‘Lei provides a formula for the laser intensity to be applied to the need.
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart, with an equation to adjust the laser intensity as taught by ‘Lei in order to provide a coating removed by laser, and a second coated region formed by irradiating laser light beam with a first intensity of laser, and the exposed region formed by irradiating the laser light beam with a second intensity of laser greater than the first intensity (‘Lei, Fig 8).
Claim 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2019/0171164 Bossart et al. (‘Bossart hereafter), and in view of U.S. 5,972,233 Becker et al. (‘Becker hereafter), and in view, U.S. 3,633,355 Taketoshi Sakata (‘Sakata hereafter), and in further view of U.S. 2007/0026205 Anton et al. (‘Anton hereafter).
Regarding Claim[s] 18, ‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata disclose all the claim limitations Except is silent regarding: wherein the coating material is removed by blasting or polishing treatment.
However, ‘Anton does teach: the coating material is removed by blasting or polishing treatment (‘Anton, Para 0049, “Textured surfaces may be buffed with a polishing compound to remove the coating on high spots and exposing portions of the underlying surface having a different color. Non-uniform application of chemical etchants by means of a brush, stamp, etc. may also be used to directly pattern colored layers.” Para 0026, “According to various exemplary embodiments, the substrate may include materials such as metals (e.g., brass, zinc, stainless steel, tin, copper, iron-based alloys, etc.), plastics (e.g., thermoset or thermoplastic materials such as a polyolefin or acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) material, etc.), ceramics, glasses (e.g., architectural type glass (e.g., shower doors, etc.), and/or composites (e.g., metal matrix materials, polymer matrix materials, ceramic and glass matrix materials, carbon graphite matrix materials, fiber reinforced composites, and the like).”).
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart, with a method of removing the removing the coating by polishing as taught by ‘Anton in order to expose the underlying surfaces having different colors (‘Anton, Para 0049).
Claim 19 & 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2019/0171164 Bossart et al. (‘Bossart hereafter), and in view of U.S. 5,972,233 Becker et al. (‘Becker hereafter), and in view, U.S. 3,633,355 Taketoshi Sakata (‘Sakata hereafter), and in further view of U.S. 6,501,014 Kubota et al. (‘Kubota hereafter).
Regarding Claim[s] 19 & 22, ‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata disclose all the claim limitations Except is silent regarding: coating the coated region and the exposed region with nitrogen or polysilazane.
However, ‘Kubota does teach: Col. 2, ln 38 – 44, “A coated article comprising a substrate made of a resin having light transparency and heat resistance, stainless
steel base metal material or glass, and a silica coating formed on at least one surface of the substrate by applying a polysilazane-containing coating solution under atmospheric pressure, followed by oxidizing treatment.” Clm 1, “A coated article comprising a substrate made of a resin having light transparency and heat resistance, stainless steel
base metal material or glass, and a silica coating formed on at least one surface of the substrate by applying a polysilazane-containing coating solution under atmospheric
pressure, followed by oxidizing treatment, wherein said silica coating layer further contains a UV long wave length fluorescence converting organic compound or organic metal complex molecule.”
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart, with a polysilazane-containing coating solution under atmospheric pressure as taught by ‘Kubota in order to provide a coated article capable of protecting a functional film or device from water vapor and gases for dramatically improve the life of the functional film or device (‘Kubota, Abst).
Claim 20 & 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2019/0171164 Bossart et al. (‘Bossart hereafter), and in view of U.S. 5,972,233 Becker et al. (‘Becker hereafter), and in view, U.S. 3,633,355 Taketoshi Sakata (‘Sakata hereafter), and in further view of U.S. 2004/0247904 Siu Yeung Winston Chan (‘Chan hereafter).
Regarding Claim[s] 20 & 23, ‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata disclose all the claim limitations Except is silent regarding: coating material is formed by a treatment method selected from one of vapor deposition, sputtering, and chemical vapor deposition.
However, ‘Chan does teach: Para 0008, “On the other hand, by way of reactive physical vapor deposition (PVD), blue coating such as titanium carbo-oxide and brown coating such as titanium oxy-nitride can be deposited on a metal surface.” Para 0020, “By way of simple PVD method, an aluminum alloy, i.e. an aluminum alloy including aluminum and at least one other metal, e.g. such refractory metals as titanium (Ti), zirconium (Zr), hafnium (Hf), vanadium (V), niobium (Nb) and tantalum (Ta), may first be deposited onto the surface of the substrate.” Para 0002, “In the consumer market, in addition to the functions of the products, aesthetic features also play an important role in capturing consumers attention and promoting sale. Colours and metallic feel are two of such important aesthetic features.”
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘Bossart, with a coating material formed by physical vapor deposition (PVD) as taught by ‘Chan in order to provide aesthetic features for the consumer market (‘Chan, Para 0002).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim[s] 12 is/are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the independent or dependent claims, specifically does not show: “shaping Tamahagane steel into a watch component shape,” “ forming an oxide film on a surface of the Tarnahagane steel,”
The closest prior art is as cited above (‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata).
‘Bossart, ‘Becker and ‘Sakata does not teach a watch component of Tamahagane steel. Neither of these references provides the Tamahagane steel. Also, neither of these references anticipates nor renders obvious the combinations of limitations mentioned above. To modify the prior art would require improper hindsight and furthermore would destroy the workability of the references cited. Claims 24 - 27, are also allowed because they are dependent on claim 12.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claim 10, limitation “peeling a part of the coating material to form an exposed region form which the material color of the metal member is exposed; and
forming a blade-pattern design on the metal member at a boundary part between the coated region and the exposed region,” needs to be clarified.
Conclusion
Examiner encourages Applicant to fill out and submit form PTO-SB-439 to allow internet communications in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 (MPEP 02.03). Should the need arise to perfect applicant-proposed or examiner’s amendments, authorization for e-mail correspondence would have already been authorized and would save time.
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 LAWRENCE AVERICK whose telephone number is (571)270-7565. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM - 3:00PM M- F ET.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/LAWRENCE AVERICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
02/27/2026