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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
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 1-15 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1,
The term “firmly attached” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “firmly attached” is not defined by the claim, 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. That is, it is unclear what would constitute a film to be “firmly” attached rendering the scope of the claims unclear. For examination purposes, any film attached to a glass pane that is not explicitly “loosely” attached will meet the limitation requiring a film to be “firmly” attached to a glass pane.
Regarding claims 2-15,
Claims 2-15 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Thannheimer (US 2020/0122637 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 2,
Thannheimer teaches a vehicle pane (a motor vehicle pane) comprising: a glass pane (4), a composite film with splinter protection (10, an anti-shatter composite substrate) of the glass pane comprises two clear polyethylene terephthalate films (37 and 39, the same material utilized for the claimed anti-shatter films and thus may be considered “anti-shatter” films) attached to the glass pane (4) (Thannheimer: Figs. 1-2; abstract; par. 0036-0039). As the composite substrate is attached to the glass pane via an adhesive (8), it may be considered “firmly” attached (Thannheimer: Fig. 2; par. 0033).
Regarding claim 3,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 1. Thannheimer further teaches an adhesive layer (38) is placed between adjacent anti-shatter films (37 and 39) (Thannheimer: par. 0039).
Regarding claim 4,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 1. Thannheimer further teaches a hard coat (40) is applied on a side facing away from the glass pane (4) (Thannheimer: Fig. 2; par. 0039).
Regarding claim 5,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 1. Thannheimer further teaches a lamination method in which anti-splinter layers/PET films may have openings or perforations on two opposing sides of said pane (Thannheimer: par. 0021). Fig. 3 details the openings (13) being placed in an edge area (Thannheimer: Fig. 3; par. 0034).
Regarding claims 6 and 7,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 5. Thannheimer further teaches the openings are through holes in which an adhesive bead may extend through the anchoring holes and covers the edge area of the anti-shatter composite substrate to some degree (Thannheimer: Fig. 3; par. 0021 and 0034).
Regarding claim 8,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 7. Thannheimer further teaches the openings may be on opposite ends of the pane to said composite substrate (6) and adhesively bond to securely fasten the pane inner side (5) and surrounds the roof opening (Thannheimer: Fig. 3; par. 0021 and 0034). Thus, the adhesive bead that would protrude through said openings would circumferentially surround the anti-shatter composite substrate to some degree.
Regarding claim 9,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 7. Thannheimer further teaches a vehicle frame (a mounting frame) may be attached to said adhesive bead (Thannheimer: abstract; par. 0021 and 0034).
Regarding claim 10,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 9. Thannheimer further teaches the mounting frame covers the entire side of the adhesive bead facing away from the glass pane as the adhesive that is protruding through the openings of the composite substrate are to attach the frame which is located on the inner panel (the side away from the glass pane) in which the frame may surround the roof opening (2) and thus would cover the entire side of the adhesive bead facing away from the glass pane (Thannheimer: par. 0021 and 0034).
Regarding claim 11,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 5. Thannheimer further displays in Figure 3 that the anchoring holes (13) have the shape of a rectangle with rounded corners (Thannheimer: Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 1. Thannheimer further teaches the motor vehicle pane may be a side window of a motor vehicle (Thannheimer: par. 0014).
Regarding claim 15,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 1. Thannheimer further teaches the motor vehicle pane in a motor vehicle (Thannheimer: abstract; Fig. 4; par. 0014).
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.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thannheimer.
Regarding claims 12 and 13,
Thannheimer teaches the motor vehicle pane required by claim 5. Thannheimer does not explicitly teach wherein the anchoring holes have a length of 11 mm ± 0.3 mm and/or a width of 5 mm ± 0.3 mm or they are spaced from an edge of the anti-shatter composite substrate by a first distance by 3 mm ±0.3 mm and/or from each other by a second distance by 4 mm ± 0.3 mm.
However, Thannheimer does teach the openings or perforations are configured and structure in a way to allow adhesive beads to penetrate through said openings or perforations to reinforce the fastening of said PET films to a roof covering inner panel or fixed glazing, to a vehicle frame (Thannheimer: par. 0021).
Therefore, lacking criticality, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure (adjusting the dimensions and spacings of the anchoring holes, such as within the claimed ranges) to optimize adhesive bead penetration to improve fastening of the PET films to the inner panel or fixed glazing as taught by Thannheimer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Travis M Figg whose telephone number is (571)272-9849. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Maria Veronica D. Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/TRAVIS M FIGG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights