DETAILED ACTION
The present application is a Continuation Application (CON) of PCT/JP2022/004141.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on February 8, 2021.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fan et al. (WO 2020/073254 A1).
Claim 1. Fan discloses obtaining a glass ceramic article within a comparative example in which a f3-quartz is used as a crystal phase and a glass phase occupies 70 vol%, as a result of heat-treating a glass having the following chemical composition: 70 wt% of SiO2, 19 wt% of Al2O3, 1.9 wt% of MgO, 2.6 wt% of Li2O, 0.3 wt% of Na2O, 0.1 wt% of K2O, 2 wt% of ZrO2, 3 wt% of TiO2, and 1 wt% of ZnO ([0126] – [0127]). Thus, the calculated Young's modulus parameter (ER) and the parameter (P) of the residual glass equals the following values: ER = >75, and P = 0.520-0.570, which is calculated by subtracting the components corresponding to the crystal phase using approximately 2.2 g/cm3 as the density of the f3-quartz and approximately 2.4-2.7 g/cm3 as the density of the glass.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Click et al. (US 2020/0017399)1.
Claim 1. Click discloses a glass-ceramic article including 12±2 wt% of residual glass; 44±2 wt% of a petalite crystalline phase; and 44±2 wt% of a lithium disilicate crystalline phase (Abstract; [0100] “Example 3”), wherein the glass-ceramic has a 90% transmission in visible wavelengths ([0100]) and a haze of less than 0.2 (%), obtained by heat-treating a precursor glass sample having a thickness of 0.8 mm and the following chemical composition ([0101]). Click discloses that the residual glass comprises: 70.52 mol% of SiO2; 4.27 mol% of Al2O3; 0.85 mol% of P2O5; 22.07 mol% of Li2O; 0.05 mol% of Na2O; 0.09 mol% of K2O; 1.97 mol% of ZrO2; 0.15 mol% of SnO2; and 0.02 mol% of Fe2O3 (Example 3). When the residual glass components are calculated by subtracting the components corresponding to the 44 wt% of the petalite crystal phase and the 44 wt% of the lithium disilicate crystalline phase from the glass ceramic composition, Click discloses that the chemical composition of the residual glass contains: 46.85 mol% of SiO2; 1.74 mol% of Al2O3; 10.11 mol% of P2O5; 14.18 mol% of Li2O; 0.55 mol% of Na2O; 1.09 mol% of K2O; 23.46 mol% of ZrO2; 1.77 mol% of SnO2; and 0.26 mol% of Fe2O3 (Example 3). Thus, the calculated Young's modulus parameter (ER) and the parameter (P) of the residual glass equals the following values: ER = 83.8 and P = 0.531 ([0042]; [0100]).
Claim 3. Click discloses a glass-ceramic article including 12±2 wt% of residual glass; 44±2 wt% of a petalite crystalline phase; and 44±2 wt% of a lithium disilicate crystalline phase ([0100] “Example 3”).
Claims 5-6. Click discloses that the residual glass comprises: 70.52 mol% of SiO2; 4.27 mol% of Al2O3; 0.85 mol% of P2O5; 22.07 mol% of Li2O; 0.05 mol% of Na2O; 0.09 mol% of K2O; 1.97 mol% of ZrO2; 0.15 mol% of SnO2; and 0.02 mol% of Fe2O3 (Example 3). When the residual glass components are calculated by subtracting the components corresponding to the 44 wt% of the petalite crystal phase and the 44 wt% of the lithium disilicate crystalline phase from the glass ceramic composition, Click discloses that the chemical composition of the residual glass contains: 46.85 mol% of SiO2; 1.74 mol% of Al2O3; 10.11 mol% of P2O5; 14.18 mol% of Li2O; 0.55 mol% of Na2O; 1.09 mol% of K2O; 23.46 mol% of ZrO2; 1.77 mol% of SnO2; and 0.26 mol% of Fe2O3 (Example 3). Thus, the calculated Young's modulus parameter (ER) and the parameter (P) of the residual glass equals the following values: ER = 83.8 and P = 0.531 ([0042]; [0100]).
Claim 10. Click discloses wherein the glass-ceramic has a 90% transmission in visible wavelengths ([0100]) and a haze of less than 0.2 (%), obtained by heat-treating a precursor glass sample having a thickness of 0.8 mm and the following chemical composition ([0101]).
Claim 11. Click discloses that the precursor glasses and glass-ceramics may be generically described as lithium-containing aluminosilicate glasses ([0044]).
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, 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 2, 4, 7-9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Click et al. (US 2020/0017399).
Claim 2. Click discloses that the residual glass comprises: 70.52 mol% of SiO2; 4.27 mol% of Al2O3; 0.85 mol% of P2O5; 22.07 mol% of Li2O; 0.05 mol% of Na2O; 0.09 mol% of K2O; 1.97 mol% of ZrO2; 0.15 mol% of SnO2; and 0.02 mol% of Fe2O3 (Example 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the concentration range(s) of oxides within the residual glass in Click to the range(s) as claimed, because it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the content of oxides within the residual glass in Click to the range as claimed, because it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claims 7-9. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the ratio(s) of oxides within the residual glass in Click to the range(s) as claimed, because it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 12. Click discloses the glass-ceramic article is capable of being chemically strengthened using one or more ion exchange techniques ([0036]; [0092] – [0093]); wherein ion exchange can occur by subjecting one or more surfaces of such glass-ceramic article to one or more ion exchange mediums (for example molten salt baths), having a specific composition and temperature, for a specified time period to impart to the one or more surfaces with compressive stress layer(s) (Fig. 5; [0092]). Click discloses that the adjustment of the ion exchange conditions affects the surface compressive stress profile (Fig. 5 illustrates trend toward a compressive stress of nearly 200 MPa with a depth of the compressive stress layer to be approximately 0.4 mm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the ion exchange conditions in Click to achieve the surface compressive stress in the range as claimed, because it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Yuan (US 2020/0131080).
Yuan discloses a glass-ceramic article and a glass-ceramic for an electric device cover plate, the glass-ceramic comprises, as a predominant crystalline phase, lithium silicate and the quartz crystalline phase, and has a composition expressed in weight percent including: SiO2: 65-85%, Al2O3: 1-15%, Li2O: 5-15%, ZrO2: 0.1-10%, P2O5: 0.1-10%, K2O: 0-10%, MgO: 0-10%, ZnO: 0-10%, and Na2O: 0-5%.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Crystal J. Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-6242. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571) 272-4137. 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.
/CRYSTAL J LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
1 See also Click et al. (WO 2020/018309 A2)