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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyuki (WO 2015163161) as evidenced by Bickerstaff et al. (US 2911759).
Regarding claims 1 and 4-5, Hiroyuki discloses a method for fabricating a glass article (2), the method comprising:
molding a glass via the float method
the glass forming method is not limited to the overflow downdraw method, and any forming method such as a float method may be used
thus the float method having a tin surface by floating a molten glass raw material above molten tin and further polished as well-known to the skilled artisan and evidenced by Bickerstaff (at least Col 1; lines 39-46, and Col 2; lines 35-38);
Hiroyuki discloses forming a protective layer (3) on either or both surfaces of the molded glass thus including a tin side;
Hiroyuki discloses cutting the glass to a predetermined size; any size is considered a predetermined size considered the broadest reasonable interpretation
Next, the plate-shaped article 2 is cut together with the protection member 3
three-dimensionally machining a non-tin surface opposed to the tin surface,
removing the protective layer via peeling and machining; and
Hiroyuki suggests chemically strengthening the glass.
chemically strengthened by immersion in a potassium nitrate solution at 430 ° C. for 1 hour
It is unclear from the machine translation if the chemical strengthening occurs prior to the glass sheet being coated with the protective layer or after removing the protective layer.
Selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious according to MPEP 2144.04.
Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959) (Prior art reference disclosing a process of making a laminated sheet wherein a base sheet is first coated with a metallic film and thereafter impregnated with a thermosetting material was held to render prima facie obvious claims directed to a process of making a laminated sheet by reversing the order of the prior art process steps.). See also In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results)
Alternatively, a skilled artisan would be motivated to perform chemical strengthening before or after removing the protective layer as motivated to produce a chemically strengthened glass.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyuki (WO 2015163161) and further in view of Luzzato (US 20170334770).
Regarding claims 2-3, Hiroyuki does not specifically indicate secondarily polishing the chemically strengthened glass.
In analogous art Luzzato discloses further polishing subsequent to chemically strengthening glass [0075], [0084], to polish the glass, remove unwanted remaining coating [0010] or polishing to fine tune asymmetrical chemical stress [0162], [0171], [0183].
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Hiroyuki by polishing the chemically strengthened glass as motivated to obtain the desired stress thus equivalent to the claimed secondarily polishing.
Regarding claims 6-7, Luzzatto discloses three-dimensionally machining glass via CNC and polishing to form a cover glass shape [0182]-[0183]. It would be obvious to modify Hiroyuki and use CNC machining methods to shape a cover glass with a smaller area in Fig 21-26.
The combined teachings do not indicate whether the CNC machining occurs on the tin side or non tin side however it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to machine either side of the glass with the expected result of shaping the plate to a cover glass.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Hiroyuki in view of Bickerstaff does indeed teach producing a glass sheet by float method but does not teach machining the surface of the glass opposite to the surface that contacts the tin layer. Applicant argues that Hiroyuki discloses machining a side surface, not a main surface.
In response to this argument, Hiroyuki discloses the processing tool 10 in Fig 1. It does machining the edge and both surfaces. The claim does not state a “main surface” and this term is not clearly defined. The claim states a method “comprising” The transitional term "comprising", which is synonymous with "including," "containing," or "characterized by," is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. See, e.g., Mars Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 377 F.3d 1369, 1376, 71 USPQ2d 1837, 1843 (Fed. Cir. 2004) it does not pre-clude both surfaces from being machined.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2021/0107826, processing folding portion by etching
US 20170239771 etching/ machining (s200, S300)
US20190222683 [0082] etch/ cnc machine
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JODI COHEN FRANKLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3966. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am-4 pm.
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, Alison Hindelang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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.
JODI COHEN FRANKLIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1741
/JODI C FRANKLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741