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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment filed 6/29/2026. Claims 1-7 are amended and claims 1-14 are currently pending.
Specification
The amendment filed 6/29/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the description of reference numerals corresponding to Fig. 1A, and partly Fig. 1B, is acceptable but the description of reference numerals 500 and 600 were not evidenced as possessed in in the originally-filed disclosure.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 500, and 600. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because Figures 3, 5, 7, and 10 are illegibly reproduced with small, blurry textual overlays and chart labels. Text in Figs. 3, 5, 10 is too small, compact, and low-contrast to be legibly reproduced. Further, Fig. 3 microscopy images are of so low contrast that the image amounts to six modeled gray rectangles failing to show that which Applicant describes. For Fig. 7, there is a label overlaid with an arrow end in the center of the figure that may read “0.9 V” though is illegibly reproduced. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. No. 8,422,114 to Hashimura, et al. (hereinafter Hashimura) in view of US Pat. 9,372,283 to Nikoobakht (hereinafter Nikoobakht).
Regarding claim 1, Hashimura discloses an active dichroic optical device comprising: a first active refractive index modulation layer (bottom electrode 302, Figs. 3-10); a metal nanostructure (plasmonic particles embodied as “examples of particle structures include spherical, disk, composite shell, dome, egg, cup, rod, bar, pyramid, and star… the composite shell structure may comprise a metal core surrounded by a dielectric shell, or a dielectric core surrounded by a metal shell, in one aspect, the composite shell dielectric may have a refractive index that varies in response to electric fields”; Figs. 3-10; col. 4, ln. 27-col. 5, ln. 67) deposited on the first active refractive index modulation layer, the metal nanostructure comprising a plurality of metal nanoparticles having a particle size of 1nm to 30nm (“the plasmonic particles 310 have a size 700 in the range of 10 nanometers (nm) to 300 nm”); and a second active refractive index modulation layer (first dielectric layer 304, composite shell, and upper electrode 306, Figs. 3-10; col. 4, ln. 27-col. 5, ln. 67) disposed on the metal nanostructure and surrounding the plurality of metal nanoparticles (Figs. 3-10), wherein the metal nanostructure reflects a first wavelength of applied light, transmits a second wavelength of the applied light, and scatters a third wavelength of the applied light, and the first wavelength, the second wavelength, and the third wavelength are different from one another (intrinsic to disclosed structures, Figs. 10 & 13; col. 6, ln. 62-col. 7, ln. 7), a resonance wavelength of applied light (inherent to plasmonic layer and particles, Fig. 3-10 & 15; col. 4, ln. 27-col. 5, ln. 67 and col. 6, ln. 62-col. 7, ln. 7), the first active refractive index modulation layer and the second active refractive index modulation layer modulate the first wavelength, the second wavelength, and the third wavelength by modulating a refractive index of the first active refractive index modulation layer and a refractive index of the second active refractive index modulation layer in response to external energy applied to the active dichroic optical device (col. 8, ln. 14-col. 9, ln. 20).
Hashimura discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose a substrate and wherein each of the first active refractive index modulation layer and the second active refractive index modulation layer comprises at least one active refractive index tunable material selected from the group consisting of polyaniline, PEDOT-PSS, a Ge₂Sb₂SexTe₅-x, alloy in which X is an integer from 0 to 5, Sb₂Se₃, Sb2S3 , VO2, and TiO2.
Nikoobakht discloses a substrate (“ base substrate (101) can be formed of any suitable material and thickness; for instance, the base substrate (101) can be a rigid surface, conductive or non-conductive, such as glass or any flexible surface such as a polymer, biopolymer or fabric”) and wherein each of the first active refractive index modulation layer and the second active refractive index modulation layer comprises at least one active refractive index tunable material selected from the group consisting of polyaniline, PEDOT-PSS, a Ge₂Sb₂SexTe₅-x, alloy in which X is an integer from 0 to 5, Sb₂Se₃, Sb2S3 , VO2, and TiO2 (“conductive surfaces include, but are not limited to, … poly(aniline)s”; col. 10, ll. 12-32).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a substrate and active refractive index modulation layer as taught by Nikoobakht with the system as disclosed by Hashimua. The motivation would have been to control light transmission, absorption and detection in photoconductive detectors, optical filters, optical switches, pixel arrays, and electrochromic windows for controlling the transmission and absorption of incident and transmitted light (abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Hashimura discloses the substrate is a transparent electrode containing indium tin oxide (ITO), fluorine tin oxide (FTO), or indium zinc oxide (IZO) (“the bottom electrode 302 and top electrode 306 are transparent to a first range of wavelengths in the visible spectrum of light, made from a material such as indium tin oxide (ITO) or ZnO”).
In Nikoobakht, the embodiment in Fig. 6B deposits nanostructures on conductive layer 105 embodied as optionally ITO (col. 10, ll. 12-32) and conductive layer 105 would be understood to match the substrate and first active refractive modulation layer in this embodiment.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a substrate and active refractive index modulation layer as taught by Nikoobakht with the system as disclosed by Hashimua. The motivation would have been to control light transmission, absorption and detection in photoconductive detectors, optical filters, optical switches, pixel arrays, and electrochromic windows for controlling the transmission and absorption of incident and transmitted light (abstract).
Regarding claim 3, Hashimura discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose polyaniline.
Nikoobakht discloses at least one of the active refractive index modulation layer and the second active refractive index modulation layer comprises polyaniline (col. 10, ll. 12-32).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a substrate and active refractive index modulation layer as taught by Nikoobakht with the system as disclosed by Hashimura. The motivation would have been to control light transmission, absorption and detection in photoconductive detectors, optical filters, optical switches, pixel arrays, and electrochromic windows for controlling the transmission and absorption of incident and transmitted light (abstract).
Regarding claim 4, Hashimura discloses the plurality of metal nanoparticles comprise is at least one metal selected from the group consisting of gold, silver, copper, nickel, palladium, magnesium, and aluminum (“plasmonic shell materials (610, see FIGS. 6A and 6B) include Ag, Au, Cu, Pt, Al, and alloys of the above-mentioned metals”; col. 4, ln. 27-col. 5, ln. 67).
Regarding claim 5, Hashimura discloses “the plasmonic particles 310 have a size 700 in the range of 10 nanometers (nm) to 300 nm. Typically, the plasmonic particles 310 have an average spacing 702 between particles, which is in the range of about 700 nm, or less”.
Hashimura discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose the claimed area fill percentage.
Hashimura discloses a linear fill factor suggesting at least a proximity to the claimed area fill range. The claimed range is within that which an artisan would consider obvious by routine experimentation of optimum or workable ranges. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the claimed fill factor and the motivation would have been to provide a modulation mechanism by which to tune display color (col. 4, ll. 42-50).
Regarding claim 6, Hashimura discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose a metal nanostructure layer from 2nm to 6nm.
Nikoobakht discloses the plurality of metal nanoparticles form a deposition layer having a deposition thickness of 2nm to 6nm (“the thickness of layer (102) may be at least about 1 nm, preferably at least about 5 nm”).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the claimed nanostructure layer thickness as taught by Nikoobakht with the system as disclosed by Hashimura. The motivation would have been to control light transmission, absorption and detection in photoconductive detectors, optical filters, optical switches, pixel arrays, and electrochromic windows for controlling the transmission and absorption of incident and transmitted light (abstract).
Regarding claim 7, Hashimura discloses the external energy is one of electricity, heat, or pressure (“ the first dielectric material 304 has a first index of expansion in response to the first electric field between the top and bottom electrodes, and a second index of expansion in response to the second electric field”; Fig. 3-10 & 15; col. 4, ln. 27-col. 5, ln. 67 & col. 8, ln. 14-col. 9, ln. 20).
Regarding claim 12, Hashimura discloses a glass panel (Fig. 3-10) comprising the active dichroic optical device according to claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 CHRISTOPHER J STANFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3337. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM PST 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER STANFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights