DETAILED ACTION
Response to Remarks
1. Applicant’s remarks (see pg. 7), filed 07/08/2026, regarding the priority have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As stated before, the disclosure of the prior-filed application fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application, namely the limitations recited in claims 5-8, 13 and 18. The issues regarding priority have been evaluated on a claim by claim basis and not issued as ‘a blanket rejection’ as alleged by Applicant (see pg. 2 of Non-Final Office Action on 04/08/2026). Therefore, Applicant’s concern regarding claim 15 is not germane to the issue at hand.
2. Applicant is reminded that a proper reply, per 37 CFR 1.111, requires: “clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made” (37 CFR 1.111(c)). Applicant’s arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because Applicant did not present any explanation as to their thoughts on patentable novelty of the newly presented claims. Further, these arguments do not sufficiently show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
3. Applicant’s remarks (pgs. 7-11) regarding the prior art rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 have been fully considered but are also moot upon further consideration because the new grounds of rejection in light of a change of statutory basis and/or in light of Costello et al.’s teachings are necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments (on 07/08/2026), as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which they depend, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claims upon which they depend.
Claim 2 recites the limitation: “wherein at least a portion of the primary optic extends through the circuit board”. However, Claim 1 from which Claim 2 depends upon, recites “a primary optic extending through the circuit board”. Therefore, Claim 2 does not appear to further limit the claim upon which it depends since it fails to specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed in claim 1. Therefore, Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d).
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-5, 7, 9-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blank (US 20070171663 A1) in view of Costello et al. (US 2013/0292706 A1) .
Examiner’s Notes
Regarding claims 1-20, the Applicant is respectfully advised that “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” See MPEP § 2113, Section I, citing In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966. Nonetheless, the Examiner has considered the structure implied by the process steps of forming the epoxy as recited in claims 1, 9 and 15. See also In re Nordt Dev. Co., 881 F.3d 1371,1375-76, 125 USPQ2d 1817, 1820 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
Regarding Claim 1, Blank discloses: A rearview assembly (see FIGS. 3-6; ¶0022: exterior rearview mirror system 300), comprising: a housing including a dimmable reflective element and a glare sensor assembly, the glare sensor assembly including: a circuit board disposed within the housing (¶0021, 0026, 0029-30, 0034-35: dimming mirror system 300/400/500/600; ¶0029: an interior mirror assembly 520; ¶0030: housing 522; ¶0030: glare sensor 564 (that detects glare from headlights of vehicles approaching from the rear of the vehicle) for use in the electronic circuitry (also included on PCB 521) used to electrically vary the reflectance level of reflective element 510; ¶0030: Housing 522 houses printed circuit board (PCB) 521); a light sensor in communication with the circuit board (¶0030: photo-sensor 562 is adapted to be an ambient light sensor for use in the electronic circuitry); wherein the primary optic is a substantially homogeneous cured epoxy having an infrared blocker dye with a green tint that at least partially blocks infrared light from being exposed to the light sensor (¶0036: near infrared absorbing filters can be formed by incorporation (such as by casting, molding, mixing, and the like) of near infrared dyes into a polymer structure such as into polycarbonate or polystyrene or acrylic or polyester or acrylate or CR39 or a COC polyolefin or another similar optical polymer [cured epoxy]. For example, EPOLIGHT near infrared absorbing dyes can be used such as Epolin 2062. In this regard, such infrared absorbing dyes may be included in the light conduiting members [primary optic] described above so as to reduce infrared transmission though the light conduits/light pipes; ¶0037: infrared absorbing dyes included in the plastic polymeric material so that the light conduiting member is a light guide/light pipe that is substantially transmitting to visible light but that is attenuating to radiation above 600-700 nm or so, such as near-IR radiation). Use of polymeric filter materials such as the 3M.TM. material above (that optionally is moldable to a form such as a lens or cover or the like) and/or use of the infrared attenuating dyes; the Examiner notes that Epolight 2062 is known to possesses a green tint (see also evidentiary reference NPL “Technical Data Sheet…” disclosing ‘green appearance’)); a primary optic extending through the circuit board and proximate to and in communication with the light sensor and a secondary optic configured to receive and direct light to the primary optic, wherein the primary optic is disposed between the circuit board and the secondary optic (¶0030: electrically vary the reflectance level of reflective element 510 [secondary optic] by means of light guide/light pipe element 554 [primary optic] and photo-sensor 564 that is adapted to be a rearward-detecting (i.e., detecting light that passes through the rear window and that is incident on the mirror reflective element); ¶0022: photo-sensors are mounted on a common side of circuit board and are interconnected by a plurality of light pipes [extending through the circuit board]; see FIG. 5 (& also FIGS. 3-4, 6) showing primary optic 554 extending through the circuit board & proximate to and in communication with the light sensor 562, wherein the primary optic 554 is disposed between the circuit board 521 and the secondary optic 510).
Although Blank discloses an infrared blocker dye mixed with a second part comprising polymer structures (¶0036-37), Blank does not appear to explicitly disclose: wherein the substantially homogeneous cured epoxy is formed from a first part mixed with the blocker dye and a second part.
Costello is related to Blank with respect to a sensor assembly comprising: a circuit board, a light sensor, a primary optic that blocks infrared light and a secondary optic (¶0008, 0028, 0030, 0032, 0034, 0037), and Costello teaches: wherein the primary optic is a substantially homogeneous cured epoxy is formed from a first part mixed with the blocker dye and a second part (¶0032: first and second components 31 [primary optic] and 32 comprise an infrared-blocking, filtering or cutting transfer molding compound such as NITTO DENKO198 NT-MB-IRL3801 two-part epoxy resin material or PENCHEM Technologies.TM., OP 580 infrared filter optoelectronic epoxy, either of which preferably contains an amount of an infrared cutting material that has been selected by the user to achieve acceptable infrared light blocking performance; ¶0034, 0045: infrared opaque, attenuating material may be one of a paint, an ink and a dye; ¶0028: optical materials 31 and 32 are preferably single mold two-part epoxy and infrared opaque, light attenuating or blocking layers 33 disposed over components 31 and 32; see FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to slightly modify the rearview assembly of Blank in view of Costello to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a primary optic is known and would be selected to achieve acceptable infrared light blocking performance while minimizing the amount of such infrared cutting material employed to keep costs to a minimum, as taught in paragraph ¶0032 of Costello.
Regarding Claim 2, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein at least a portion of the primary optic extends through the circuit board (¶0022: photo-sensors are used in a circuit to establish a reflectance level of reflective element, and are mounted on a common side of circuit board and are interconnected by a plurality of light pipes [primary optic]; see FIGS. 3-6).
Regarding Claim 3, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the infrared blocker dye blocks between 99% and 99.99% of infrared light (¶0036: infrared blocking; the Examiner notes that the infrared blocker dye Epolin 2060 as disclosed by Blank (see rejection of claim 1 supra) blocks between 99% and 99.99% of infrared light as evidenced by the absorption spectrum of the dye provided herewith in NPL “Technical Data Sheet: Epolight 2062…” in accordance with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the recited terms in light of the instant specification filed 02/06/2024).
Regarding Claim 4, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the glare sensor assembly is disposed behind an electro-optic assembly (¶0029: an electro-optic reflective element 510 (preferably an electrochromic mirror element); ¶0030: photo-sensor 564 that is adapted to be a rearward-detecting glare sensor (that detects glare from headlights of vehicles approaching from the rear of the vehicle); see FIGS. 3-6 showing glare sensor assembly 564 is disposed behind an electro-optic assembly 510).
Regarding Claim 5, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the secondary optic includes a substantially colorless body (¶0029: an interior mirror assembly 520 that includes an electro-optic reflective element 510 (preferably an electrochromic mirror element).
Regarding Claim 7, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the primary optic and the secondary optic are in abutting contact (¶0026: a light-conduiting member 456 (that comprises, for example, an acrylic light pipe) that views through an aperture 457 in a bezel portion of mirror housing 422; see FIG. 4 showing primary optic 456 and the secondary optic 410 are in abutting contact).
Regarding Claim 9, Blank discloses: A rearview assembly, comprising: a housing including a dimmable reflective element and a glare sensor assembly, the glare sensor assembly including: a circuit board disposed within the housing; a light sensor in communication with the circuit board; and a primary optic proximate to and in communication with the light sensor, wherein the primary optic is a substantially homogeneous cured epoxy that at least partially blocks infrared light from being exposed to the light sensor and wherein the substantially homogeneous cured epoxy is formed from a first part and a second part mixed with a blocker dye; and a secondary optic configured to receive and direct light to the primary optic (see rejection of claim 1 supra).
Regarding Claim 10, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 9, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the primary optic attaches to a rear surface of the circuit board (¶0032; see FIG. 5 showing primary optic 556 attaches to a rear surface of the circuit board 521), and wherein at least a portion of the primary optic extends through the circuit board (see rejection of claim 2 supra).
Regarding Claim 11, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 9, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein light having a wavelength between 800 nm and 1,000 nm is substantially blocked by the primary optic (the Examiner notes that the infrared blocker dye Epolin 2060 as disclosed by Blank (see rejection of claim 1 supra) substantially blocks light having a wavelength between 800 nm and 1,000 nm, as evidenced by the absorption spectrum of the dye provided herewith in NPL “Technical Data Sheet: Epolight 2062…”).
Regarding Claim 12, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 9, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein light having a wavelength between 400 nm and 700 nm is not substantially blocked by the primary optic (the Examiner notes that the infrared blocker dye Epolin 2060 as disclosed by Blank (see rejection of claim 1 supra) does not substantially block light having a wavelength between 400 nm and 700 nm, as evidenced by the absorption spectrum of the dye provided herewith in NPL “Technical Data Sheet: Epolight 2062…”).
Regarding Claim 14, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 9, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the glare sensor assembly is disposed behind an electro-optic assembly (see rejection of claim 4 supra).
Regarding Claim 15, Blank discloses: A rearview assembly, comprising: a housing; a circuit board disposed within the housing; and a glare sensor assembly disposed within the housing, the glare sensor assembly including: a light sensor in communication with the circuit board (see rejection of claim 9 supra); and an optic in communication with the light sensor, wherein the optic is formed from an infrared blocker dye and a two-part cured epoxy (see rejection of claim 1 supra).
Regarding Claim 16, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 15, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the infrared blocker dye blocks infrared light (see rejection of claim 3 supra).
Regarding Claim 17, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 15, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the optic includes a primary optic proximate to and in communication with the light sensor and a secondary optic configured to receive and direct light to the primary optic (see rejection of claim 9 supra).
Regarding Claim 18, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 17, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the primary optic and the secondary optic are integrally molded together (¶0037: light conduit/light guide can be formed of polycarbonate or acrylic (and preferably, with infrared absorbing dyes included in the plastic polymeric material so that the light conduiting member is a light guide/light pipe [primary optic] that is substantially transmitting to visible light but that is attenuating to radiation above 600-700 nm or so, such as near-IR radiation). Use of polymeric filter materials above (that optionally is moldable to a form such as a lens or cover or the like) and/or use of the infrared attenuating dyes may be used in conjunction with an independently dimming exterior electro-optic mirror [primary optic]).
Regarding Claim 19, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 15, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the glare sensor assembly provides light input to the light sensor which is in communication with an interior cabin monitoring system (¶0032, 0035: Ambient light detecting photo-sensor 562 views via a light-conduiting member 554 (that comprises, for example, an acrylic light pipe or an acrylic or similar optical plastic light conduiting pathway or element) that views via terminal portion 559 towards the interior cabin roof of the vehicle out of mirror housing 522; see FIGS. 5-6).
Regarding Claim 20, Blank discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 17, as above. Blank further discloses: wherein the primary optic is a substantially homogeneous cured epoxy (see rejection of claim 9 supra).
Claims 6, 8 and 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blank (US 20070171663 A1) in view of Costello et al. (US 2013/0292706 A1), and further in view of Ockerse et al. (US 2005/0024729 A1; as cited in IDS filed 05/07/2024).
Regarding Claim 6, Blank-Costello discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank does not appear to explicitly disclose: wherein the secondary optic includes arms configured to snap-fit engage with the circuit board.
Ockerse is related to Blank with respect to a rearview assembly (FIGS. 26-31: 1600), comprising: a housing (1610) including a dimmable reflective element (¶0148: electrochromic mirror element 1620) and a glare sensor assembly (¶0148: glare sensor subassembly 1650), the glare sensor assembly including: a circuit board (1630) disposed within the housing; a light sensor (1652) in communication with the circuit board; and a primary optic (¶0192: filter 630 may be an infrared filter) proximate to and in communication with the light sensor, wherein the primary optic having an infrared blocker that at least partially blocks infrared light from being exposed to the light sensor (¶0194: a filter that separates infrared (IR) radiation from visible radiation by either blocking all IR radiation); and a secondary optic (1660) configured to receive and direct light to the primary optic, wherein the primary optic is disposed between the circuit board and the secondary optic (¶0152-55; ¶0167, 0170) and Ockerse teaches: wherein the secondary optic includes arms configured to snap-fit engage with the circuit board (¶0152: glare sensor subassembly 1650 includes a sensor device 1652 and a secondary-optical element 1660 mounted to circuit board 1630. Circuit board 1630 includes a first hole 1632 though which sensor device 1652 extends such that sensor device may be surface mounted to the rear surface 1631 of circuit board 1630…Circuit board 1630 further includes a pair of holes 1634 through which a corresponding pair of resilient legs 1662 of secondary optical element 1660 extends. Holes 1634 allow secondary optical element to be snapped into circuit board 1630 so as to extend in front of glare sensor device 1652; see FIGS. 29-30,33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to slightly modify the rearview assembly of Blank in view of Ockerse to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a secondary optic is known and would be selected to allow the sensors and the optic to be surface-mounted to the same surface (1631) of circuit board 1630, as taught in paragraph [0152] of Ockerse.
Regarding Claim 8, Blank-Costello discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 1, as above. Blank does not appear to explicitly disclose: wherein the secondary optic includes a fluted front surface configured to receive light.
Ockerse is related to Blank (see rejection of claim 6 supra) and Ockerse teaches: wherein the secondary optic includes a fluted front surface configured to receive light (see FIGS. 30,32 showing fluted front surface of secondary optic 1660; ¶0154-56: Secondary optical element 1660 functions as a lens…Secondary optical element 1660 comprises a relatively flat substrate 1664 having a front surface 1665 and a rear surface 1666…a first lenticular lens 1668 is provided on front surface 1665 of substrate 1664…First lenticular lens 1668 includes a plurality of parallel elongated first lenslets 1668a…first lenslets 1668a extend perpendicular to second lenslets 1669a so as to allow for different focal lengths in the horizontal and vertical planes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to slightly modify the rearview assembly of Blank in view of Ockerse to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a secondary optic is known and would be selected for different focal lengths in these different planes, resulting in the field of view of the glare sensor may be different horizontally than it is vertically. Thus, the field of view may be narrowed or broadened to attempt to limit the field of view to that field that is viewable through the rear window without also including other parts of the interior of the vehicle such as the rear seats as would otherwise occur particularly when the vehicle employs theater seating, as taught in paragraph [0156] of Ockerse.
Regarding Claim 13, Blank-Costello discloses the rearview assembly according to Claim 9, as above. Blank does not appear to explicitly disclose: wherein the secondary optic includes arms configured to snap-fit engage with the circuit board (see rejection of claim 6 supra).
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 extension fee 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 SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0730-1700 (EST).
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, BUMSUK WON can be reached on 571-272-2713. 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.
/SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights