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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 17 December 2025.
Claims 1-13 are currently pending in the present application.
Claims 1-7 are original, and claims 8-13 are withdrawn.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20210030134).
Re: claim 1, Kim discloses a substrate 101 (Figs. 1, 8); and a multilayer film 201, 301 covering at least a part of the substrate (covering disclosed in Figs. 1, 8), wherein a plurality of recesses is formed in a surface, of the substrate (recesses in 101 are filled with layers 201 and 301 as disclosed in Fig. 8), facing the multilayer film (facing disclosed in Fig. 8), in a cross-sectional view obtained by cutting the substrate in a thickness direction (cross-section view disclosed in Fig. 8), the plurality of recesses is defined by a first side (Fig. 14, one of the sloping left or right sides of a triangular projection portion of P1), and a second side (Fig. 14, the other of the sloping left or right sides of the triangular projection portion of P1) tilted with respect to the first side and being in contact with the first side at an end portion (tilting & contact disclosed in Fig. 14), in the cross-sectional view, a ratio of a length of the second side along the thickness direction of the substrate (calculated value, shown in table below, determined to be 7.2794, where angle C is 90 degrees, angle A was input as 20 degrees, leaving angle B to be 70 degrees, which meets the requirement in para. 152 that the difference between angles A and B must be within 30 – 70 degrees, and b being input as 20 µm, where para. 153 discloses that this length must be between 5- 30 µm) with respect to a length of the second side along a direction orthogonal to the thickness direction of the substrate (para 153 discloses that this length may be between 5 and 30 µm, and a length of 20 µm was used to calculate the values in the table below) is greater than ½ (using selected value of 20 µm and the calculated value of 7.2794, the ratio of 20/7.2794 = 2.7397, which is greater than 0.5), the multilayer film includes three or more layers of a color absorption film 301 (para. 77 discloses that absorption layer may comprise two or more layers), and a value of a brightness L* in a L*a*b* color space is equal to or less than 10 in plan view as viewed from the thickness direction of the substrate (para. 67 discloses 1-60, which overlaps the claimed range; Example 8 in Table 3 discloses a value of L as 15, which is close to the claimed range).
Values for the triangular shaped portion of the substrate were computed using a triangle calculator at https://www.triangle-calculator.com/ on 24 January 2026
PNG
media_image1.png
564
947
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Close-up of calculation portion from above
PNG
media_image2.png
346
587
media_image2.png
Greyscale
While Kim does not explicitly disclose that the color absorption film 301 is composed of a material including Cr, Kim does disclose that it may be comprised of a metal (para. 78). It has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is a prima facie indicator of obviousness (MPEP 2144.07).
Re: claim 2, Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1, and while Kim does not explicitly disclose that when the multilayer film is disposed on a planar surface, the multilayer film has a value of the brightness L* of equal to or less than 18 in plan view as viewed from the thickness direction of the multilayer film, Kim does disclose value of brightness L on a surface of unknown inclination is between 1-60 (para. 67) and further discloses in Table 3 L* values of 15 and 16 in Examples 8 and 5, respectively, and both disclosed ranges overlap the claimed range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05).
Re: claim 3, Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Kim further discloses that 3. the multilayer film includes a color adjustment film 201 composed of a material including at least one of Ta2O5, SiO2, TiO2, Al2O3, ZrO2, Nb2O5, HfO2, Na5Al3F14, Na3AlF6, AlF3, MgF2, CaF2, BaF2, YF3, LaF3, CeF3, or NdF3 (paras. 82-83 disclose titanium oxide, aluminum oxide).
Re: claim 4, Kim discloses the limitations of claim 3, and while Kim does not explicitly disclose that the color absorption film 301 includes a film composed of a material including at least one of Ag, Pt, Au, Cu, Al, Cr, Sn, Fe, or Ti, in addition to a film composed a material including Cr, Kim does disclose that it may be comprised of a metal (para. 78). It has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is a prima facie indicator of obviousness (MPEP 2144.07).
Re: claim 5, Kim discloses the limitations of claim 4, and Kim further discloses that the color adjustment film 201 is composed of a material including Al2O3 (paras 82-83 disclose aluminum oxide) and Kim further discloses that the layers of films 201 and 301 are stacked (Fig. 8). While Kim does not explicitly disclose that the color absorption film 301 is composed of a material including Cr, Kim does disclose that it may be comprised of a metal (para. 78). It has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is a prima facie indicator of obviousness (MPEP 2144.07).
Re: claim 6, Kim discloses a substrate 101 (Figs. 1, 8); and a multilayer film 201, 301 covering at least a part of the substrate (covering disclosed in Figs. 1, 8), wherein a plurality of recesses is formed in a surface, of the substrate (recesses in 101 are filled with layers 201 and 301 as disclosed in Fig. 8), facing the multilayer film (facing disclosed in Fig. 8), in a cross-sectional view obtained by cutting the substrate in a thickness direction (cross-section view disclosed in Fig. 8), the plurality of recesses is defined by a first side (Fig. 14, one of the sloping left or right sides of a triangular projection portion of P1), and a second side (Fig. 14, the other of the sloping left or right sides of the triangular projection portion of P1) tilted with respect to the first side and being in contact with the first side at an end portion (tilting & contact disclosed in Fig. 14), in the cross-sectional view, a ratio of a length of the second side along the thickness direction of the substrate (calculated value, shown in table above, determined to be 7.2794, where angle C is 90 degrees, angle A was input as 20 degrees, leaving angle B to be 70 degrees, which meets the requirement in para. 152 that the difference between angles A and B must be within 30 – 70 degrees, and b being input as 20 µm, where para. 153 discloses that this length must be between 5- 30 µm) with respect to a length of the second side along a direction orthogonal to the thickness direction of the substrate (para 153 discloses that this length may be between 5 and 30 µm, and a length of 20 µm was used to calculate the values in the table below) is greater than ½ (using selected value of 20 µm and the calculated value of 7.2794, the ratio of 20/7.2794 = 2.7397, which is greater than 0.5), a value of a brightness L* in a L*a*b* color space is equal to or less than 10 in plan view as viewed from the thickness direction of the substrate (para. 67 discloses 1-60, which overlaps the claimed range; Example 8 in Table 3 discloses a value of L as 15, which is close to the claimed range).
While Kim does not explicitly disclose when the multilayer film is disposed on a planar surface, the multilayer film has a value of the brightness L* of equal to or less than 18 in plan view as viewed from the thickness direction of the multilayer film, Kim does disclose value of brightness L on a surface of unknown inclination is between 1-60 (para. 67) and further discloses in Table 3 L* values of 15 and 16 in Examples 8 and 5, respectively, and both disclosed ranges overlap the claimed range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05).
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Furusato (US 20160154143).
Re: claim 7, Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1; however, Kim does not explicitly disclose a watch.
Furusato discloses a watch P100 (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a watch, as disclosed by Furusato, applied to the device disclosed by Kim for the purpose of optimizing the functioning of the antireflection layer while permitting predetermined color(s) to be transmitted to a viewer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA MEDICH whose telephone number is (313)446-4819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 AM - 7:00 PM ET.
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.
/ANGELA M. MEDICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871