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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2020106751 A (NOMURA TAKUMI) in view of JP 2016033109 A (SUWA KUMIKO).
PNG
media_image1.png
178
252
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Per claim 1, Nomura teaches a plastic lens for spectacles [1], the plastic lens comprising: a plastic base [11: “The material of the lens base material 11 may be plastic or inorganic glass”]; and a dielectric multilayer film formed directly or indirectly on a film formation surface of the base [antireflective film], wherein the dielectric multilayer film includes one or more low refractive index dielectric layers [13L], one or more high refractive index dielectric layers [13H], and an antibacterial layer [see Nomura’s machine translation: “the silver (Ag) particles in the coating film 14, the antibacterial performance in the ultraviolet light and visible light regions can be improved”], is disposed closer to an air side than all of the low refractive index dielectric layers and all of the high refractive index dielectric layers are, and a physical film thickness of the antibacterial layer is less than 50 nm [see Nomura machine translation: “The coating film 14 containing the tungsten oxide particles, the tin oxide particles, and the silver particles preferably has a thickness of 3 nm or more and 30 nm or less from the viewpoint of thinning. Particularly preferably, the range is 10 nm or more and 15 nm or less. In the present invention, by using the above-mentioned tungsten oxide particles and the above-mentioned silver particles in combination, high antibacterial performance can be obtained even with the thin film of the coating film 14 having a thickness of, for example, 30 nm or less. That is, the film thickness of the coating film 14 that exhibits antibacterial performance can be reduced, and therefore, the optical characteristics of the lens surface are not deteriorated. The present invention is particularly effective when the film thickness of the coating film 14 that exhibits the antibacterial property is a thin film of 30 nm or less.”]
Nomura lacks the antibacterial layer is a dielectric layer containing metal ion-carrying zeolite. However, Suwa machine translation teaches an antibacterial film comprising “silver ions (a) and / or copper ions (d), zeolite particles, smectite particles, and calcium phosphate compound particles are preferable. When both the silver ion (a) and the copper ion (d) are contained in the silicon oxide matrix film, only the silver ion (a) may be supported on the cation-adsorptive particles and used. Only d) may be used supported on cation-adsorbing particles, or both may be used supported on cation-adsorbing particles. When both are supported on cation-adsorbing particles, both may be supported on the same cation-adsorptive particles, and only cation-adsorptive particles supporting only silver ions (a) and copper ions (d). A combination of the supported cation-adsorbing particles may be used.” Suwa teaches that the problem to be solved is “[t]o provide a glass with a film which is excellent in antibacterial and antiviral activity owing to containing silver and in which an occurrence of yellowing owing to silver is suppressed” would have been an expected benefit. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Suwa with Nomura.
Per claim 2, Nomura et al. teaches the plastic lens for spectacles according to claim 1, wherein the metal ion- carrying zeolite is silver ion-carrying zeolite [inherent to the combination, see Suwa’s machine translation: “silver ions (a) and / or copper ions (d), zeolite particles, smectite particles, and calcium phosphate compound particles are preferable. When both the silver ion (a) and the copper ion (d) are contained in the silicon oxide matrix film, only the silver ion (a) may be supported on the cation-adsorptive particles and used. Only d) may be used supported on cation-adsorbing particles, or both may be used supported on cation-adsorbing particles. When both are supported on cation-adsorbing particles, both may be supported on the same cation-adsorptive particles, and only cation-adsorptive particles supporting only silver ions (a) and copper ions (d). A combination of the supported cation-adsorbing particles may be used.”]
Per claim 3, Nomura et al. teaches the plastic lens for spectacles according to claim 1, wherein the antibacterial layer contains SiO2 [inherent to the combination, see Suwa’s machine translation: “in order to produce an antibacterial / antiviral membrane, Patent Document 1 discloses a method of forming a film by mixing silver and / or copper without performing a desalting treatment on the aqueous solution of sodium silicate. It was the method that was done. According to this method, silicate gel is generated from sodium silicate, and SiO .sub.2 fine particles are generated by solidification.]
Per claim 4, Nomura et al. teaches the plastic lens for spectacles according to claim 3, but lacks the antibacterial layer is formed from a sintered body obtained by collectively sintering the metal ion-carrying zeolite and SiO2. However, it was common knowledge incorporate a sintering process in order to form durable antibacterial thin layers of metal-ion supported zeolite in a silica matrix. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 5, Nomura et al. the plastic lens for spectacles according to claim 1, but lacks the dielectric multilayer film formed on each of both surfaces of the base. However, it was common knowledge to incorporate an antireflective film on both sides of the base layer in order to reduce light reflection. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 6, Nomura et al. teaches the plastic lens for spectacles according to claim 1, wherein the dielectric multilayer film is formed via a hard coating film.
Per claims 7-8, Nomura et al. teaches the plastic lens for spectacles according to claim 1, but lacks the dielectric multilayer film includes an antifouling layer exhibiting at least one of water-repellency and oil-repellency, and the antifouling layer is disposed closer to the air side than the antibacterial layer is and the antifouling layer is a fluorine-containing organosilicon compound. However, was common knowledge to form an antifouling layer exhibiting at least one of water-repellency and oil-repellency, and the antifouling layer is disposed closer to the air side than the antibacterial layer is and the antifouling layer is a fluorine-containing organosilicon compound in order to lens smudging. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the remarks, filed 12/9/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Suwa.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/9/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Regardless, the PTO's rejection is erroneous because there would have been no reason for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have considered modifying Nomura based on the teachings of Suwa, in the first place, since the coating layer disclosed in Nomura already has antibacterial properties. Further, Suwa discloses that the antibacterial film includes silver ions, which impart antibacterial properties to the antibacterial film, and zeolite particles to absorb and carry the silver ions (see Suwa, paragraphs [0019] and [0026]). Nomura discloses that the coating layer includes silver particles, which also imparts antibacterial properties to the coating layer (see Nomura, paragraphs [0033] and [0036]). However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the silver ions disclosed in Suwa, which are formed by dissolving a silver salt in a solvent (see Suwa, paragraph [0132], for example), are not the same as the silver particles (i.e., particles of silver metal) disclosed in Nomura. As such, there would have been no reason for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have considered modifying Nomura based on the teachings of Suwa, because the zeolite particles included in the antibacterial film disclosed in Suwa would have been incapable of absorbing the silver particles included in the coating layer disclosed in Nomura. Simply stated, the zeolite particles disclosed in Suwa would have served no purposed in the coating film disclosed in Nomura.”
Suwa teaches that the motivation for using the disclosed the “silver ions (a) and / or copper ions (d), zeolite particles” would have been reduce yellowing. As such one would have been motivated to combine Suwa’s antibacterial film with Nomura.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A DUDEK whose telephone number is (571)272-2290. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-4:30 MT.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/JAMES A DUDEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871