DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 9-15 in the reply filed on 08/21/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 9-11, 13-15, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui (2011/0088772) in view of Perkins (2022/0102639), Weidman (2007/0190362) and Tu (2012/0274231).
Usui teaches a method of forming a useful transparent conductor – the conductor is made, for example, of a combination of fluorine doped tin oxide, FTO, and indium tin oxide, ITO, see [0051]. Such a teaching includes forming an FTO layer and then forming an ITO layer on the FTO layer (i.e. teaching the claimed FTO substrate for forming the ITO layer). The teachings include depositing the transparent conductor (ITO) by methods including spray pyrolysis [0078], but do not provide details of the process, and further, the teachings include hydrophilicity but do not teach the claimed steps for producing such a layer.
Perkins teaches that ITO (and other transparent oxide) films are formed using a solution applied on a substrate by methods including spray coating [0035-38]. The method further including heating the substrate comprising the solution at first to a temperature to cure the solution [0041] (i.e. to evaporate solvent is understood as a cure) and then includes annealing the substrate [0042].
It would have been obvious at the effective date of the invention to form the ITO layer of Usui using the spray coating method of Perkins as Usui teaches forming such layers by spray pyrolysis but does not provide further details such as curing and etching. The general “spray coating” process of Perkins is considered to include the spray pyrolysis process noted by Usui, or, alternatively, the method of Perkins would be applied as an alternative spray process that is taught as useful for forming an ITO layer. In combining the art, one would apply the ITO layer to the FTO film as directed by Usui, using the method of Perkins to form the ITO layer, the method including the claimed precursor solution, curing and annealing steps as noted.
The combined art does not teach the hydrophilic treatment and also does not teach the specifically claimed conditions for heat treatment and annealing.
Tu teaches that a useful surface preparation for a tin oxide substrate includes treatment with an oxygen plasma in order to clean and also enhance hydrophilicity [0022]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to apply the O2 plasma of Tu in the method of Usui as Usui generally teaches preparing a surface but does not teach the O2 plasma and Tu teaches that such a treatment is useful for a tin oxide substrate in enhancing hydrophilicity already desired by Usui.
The combined art still does not teach the specific anneal/heating conditions as claimed – but Weidman teaches that wherein a liquid solution is applied to form a layer, it is useful to first anneal in air and then under a reducing atmosphere such as with forming gas, such processing is useful within various types of films and used in conjunction with ITO layers [0050-51]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to apply the heating/annealing conditions (atmospheres) of Weidman in the method of Usui and Perkins as Perkins teaches multiple heating steps but is silent on the atmospheres and Weidman teaches analogous methods of producing solid films from solution. Perkins already teaches the dual steps and one of ordinary skill only requires guidance on the environments – the teachings already include such gases a hydrogen and nitrogen, which comprise forming gas. In regard to the temperatures, Perkins teaches 50-250 C for an initial heating and an anneal at 350-1000 C for 15 mins to 4 hours for example [0043].
Regarding claim 10, Perkins teaches all of the claimed methods [0038].
Regarding claim 11, Perkins teaches annealing in a hydrogen environment [0044] which is understood as reducing.
Regarding claims 13 - 15, Perkins teaches indium nitrate and tin chloride [0006]] and also forming such films including a cadmium dopant using Cd nitrate [0033, 34].
Regarding claims 21 and 22, the prior art teachings do not describe the sheet resistance and surface roughness, but, as the prior art and instant application teach the same process steps, the same process steps in the instant application and prior art must necessarily produce the same results. In other words, by applying a precursor solution to form a transparent conductive film on an FTO film after treating the FTO film with O2 plasma and thereafter heating and annealing the substrate as described in the prior art as in the instant claims, the same results of the sheet resistance and surface roughness as claimed.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui (2011/0088772) et. al. in view of Hayashi (2012/0015472).
Regarding claim 12, Perkins teaches annealing the film in a number of environments, but is silent on the precise atmosphere of the cure. Hayashi teaches that in forming a transparent conductive film by solution, it is operable to cure the film in an air environment [0139]. It would have been obvious at the effective date of the invention to cure the film of Perkins in an air environment as the teachings include a cure but do not state what the background is and Hayashi teaches the same step in (hot) air.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 08/21/2026, with respect to the rejections of instant claims under 103 have been fully considered – the further teachings of Weidman and Tu, however, as applied above, teach the further claimed elements of the amendments.
The Office agrees that Usui and Perkins does not teach certain now-claimed elements but those are now addressed by the inclusion of the additional references. In regard to the comments of applicants that Usui expressly teaches an FTO film on an ITO film, the Office agrees, but the more general teachings, present in [0051] as cited are present and relied on for the rejection. Per MPEP 2123, the rejection is reasonably made over the prior arts broad disclosure rather than preferred embodiments.
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 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 JOSEPH A MILLER, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5825. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. The fax phone number for the organization where this application 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/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.
/JOSEPH A MILLER, JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights