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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 10/30/25, have been entered in the above-identified application.
Any rejections made in the previous action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-16, 18-22, and 24-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "wherein the second seal layer, comprising boron oxide and/or bismuth oxide" in lines 17-18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The Examiner recommends using language such as “wherein the second seal layer comprises boron oxide and/or bismuth oxide, and overlaps and extends between both the first and second continuous seal layer portions” or the like.
Claims 2-6, 8-16, 18-22, and 24-33 are rejected for failing to cure the deficiencies of claim 1.
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 1-6, 8-16, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogan et al (US 9,593,527 B2) in view of Choi et al (EP 3 878 824 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hogan teaches a vacuum insulating panel (e.g., vacuum insulating glass) comprising a first substrate (2); a second substrate (3); a plurality of spacers (5) provided in a gap between at least the first and second substrates, wherein the gap is at pressure less than atmospheric pressure a seal provided at least partially between at least the first and second substrates, the seal comprising a first seal layer (17a) (e.g., second frit material) and a second seal layer (15b) (e.g., first frit material) ; wherein the first seal layer comprises a first continuous seal layer portion comprising seal material that surrounds at least the gap as viewed from above; wherein the second seal layer, overlaps and extends over the first seal layer (abstract, col 7, line 47 – col 8, line 20; figs 2, 5).
Regarding the limitation “wherein the second seal layer comprises boron oxide and/or bismuth oxide;” Hogan teaches the primer frit or first frit material comprises bismuth oxide (col 7, line 37 – col 8, line 3).
Regarding the limitations “a second continuous seal layer portion comprising seal material that also surrounds at least the gap as viewed from above, wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are spaced apart from each other as viewed from above so that a space is located between at least the first and second continuous seal layer portions;” and “wherein the second seal layer, comprising boron oxide and/or bismuth oxide, overlaps and extends between both the first and second continuous seal layer portions;” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to duplicate the first seal layer or second frit material of Hogan resulting in a second continuous seal layer portion comprising seal material that also surrounds at least the gap as viewed from above, wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are spaced apart from each other as viewed from above so that a space is located between at least the first and second continuous seal layer portions; wherein the second seal layer, comprising boron oxide and/or bismuth oxide, overlaps and extends between both the first and second continuous seal layer portions; since duplication of parts is prima facie obvious (MPEP § 2144.04 VI B). Furthermore, this duplication would come with the added motivation of having two seals, an inner and an outer or a first and second, in case either one or the other were to fail.
Hogan fails to teach wherein each of the first and second seal layer portions comprises a same ceramic material comprising from about 40-70 wt.% tellurium oxide. However, Hogan teaches the use of tellurium oxides and vanadium oxides for frit sealing materials (col 11, lines 27-34; col 16, line 40 – col 17, line 2; col 18, lines 23-49).
Choi teaches a low temperature-calcined lead-free glass frit and paste, and a vacuum glass assembly using the same; wherein the glass frit may be calcined at low temperature, may ensure a low crystallization tendency, proper fluidity and excellent chemical durability and may be applied in a sealing process of tempered glass (para 24); wherein the component TeO2 in the glass frit may improve fluidity of the glass frit, and 30-50 wt% of TeO2 may be included in the glass frit (para 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to substitute the glass frit of Choi for the glass frit of the first and second seal layer portions of Hogan; since substituting known equivalents for the same purpose as recognized in prior art is prima facie obvious (MPEP § 2144.06 II); and, since it is prima facie obvious to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (MPEP § 2144.07). This substitution comes with the additional motivation of using a glass frit that may be calcined at low temperature, may ensure a low crystallization tendency, proper fluidity and excellent chemical durability.
In the alternative, per the teachings of Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the amount of tellurium oxide or TeO2 in the frit of Hogan to optimize the fluidity of the glass frit.
Choi teaches 30-50 wt% of TeO2 may be included in the glass frit (para 27). This range substantially overlaps that of the instant claims. It has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Choi, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claims 2-6 and 29, the duplication of the first seal layer or second frit material of Hogan would have resulted in an embodiment wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are concentric as viewed from above; wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are substantially rectangular in shape as viewed from above; wherein the first continuous seal layer portion surrounds the second continuous seal layer portion as viewed from above; wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are in a common plane; wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are substantially parallel to each other along at least part of at least one side of the panel; wherein the first and second seal layer portions do not physically contact each other at any location in the panel.
Regarding claim 8, Choi teaches wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions each comprise tellurium oxide and vanadium oxide, and by wt.% comprise more tellurium oxide than vanadium oxide (para 25).
Regarding claims 9-16, Hogan teaches the use of tellurium oxides and vanadium oxides for frit sealing materials (col 11, lines 27-34; col 16, line 40 – col 17, line 2; col 18, lines 23-49). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pick that of TeO3, TeO3+1, TeO4, VO2, V2O5, and V2O3, since it is prima facie obvious to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (MPEP § 2144.07). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to adjust the amount of TeO3, TeO3+1, TeO4, VO2, V2O5, and V2O3, in the first and second continuous seal layers to adjust the physical and mechanical properties of each layer. "[W]here 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." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05 II A). Regarding claim 21 and 27, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the density of the first seal layer and the second seal layer, and there in the difference between their densities, as well as the width of the first seal layer and second seal layer, and there in the difference between their widths, to optimize the physical and mechanical properties of the seals (i.e., weight, overall strength, etc) as well as their ability to seal (e.g., ability to properly seal without overuse of material).
Regarding claim 22, Hogan teaches the first seal layer (e.g., 17a) is a main seal layer and the second seal layer (e.g., 15b) is a primer layer (col 7, line 58 – col 8, line 3).
Regarding claim 24, Hogan teaches it seals may comprise three overlapping parts (15a, 17a, 15b) (col 7, line 58 – col 8, line 20; fig 5), so the duplication of the first seal layer or second frit material of Hogan would have resulted in an embodiment the seal further comprises a third seal layer overlapping at least one of the first and second continuous seal layer portions.
Regarding claim 26, Hogan teaches it seals may comprise three overlapping parts (15a, 17a, 15b) (col 7, line 58 – col 8, line 20; fig 5), i.e., wherein for at least one location of the seal, the first seal layer has a first thickness, the second seal layer has a second thickness, and the third seal layer has a third thickness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the thickness of each seal to optimize the physical and mechanical properties of the seals (i.e., weight, overall strength, etc) as well as their ability to seal (e.g., ability to properly seal without overuse of material).
Regarding claims 28 and 30-33, Hogan teaches wherein the seal is substantially lead-free; wherein the first and second substrates comprise glass substrates; wherein the first and second substrates comprise tempered glass substrates; wherein the seal is a hermetic edge seal of the vacuum insulating panel; wherein the panel is configured for use in a window (title, col 2, lines 55-63; col 4, lines 37-57).
Claims 18-20 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogan and Choi as applied to claims 1 and 24, and further in view of Dennis (US 2012/0213954 A1).
Hogan as modified by Choi teaches the vacuum insulating panels of claims 1 and 24. In addition Hogan teaches sealing material frits comprising bismuth oxide (col 4, line 57 – col 5, line 12); as does Choi (para 13)
Hogan as modified by Choi fails to suggest the limitations of claims 18-20 and 25.
Dennis teaches vacuum insulated glass using frit seal materials such as B2O3 (i.e., boron oxide) and Bi2O3 (i.e., bismuth oxide) (para 2, 52, table 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the boron oxide of Dennis with the bismuth oxide frit sealing materials of Hogan as modified by Choi, since it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose (MPEP § 2144.06 I). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to adjust the amount of boron oxide and bismuth oxide in the second and third seal layers to adjust or optimize the physical and mechanical properties of each layer. "[W]here 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." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05 II A).
Claims 34-38, 40-42, and 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogan et al (US 9,593,527 B2) in view of Choi et al (EP 3 878 824 A1).
Regarding claims 34 and 42, Hogan teaches a vacuum insulating panel (e.g., vacuum insulating glass) comprising a first glass substrate (2); a second glass substrate (3); a plurality of spacers (5) provided in a gap between at least the first and second substrates, wherein the gap is at pressure less than atmospheric pressure a seal provided at least partially between at least the first and second substrates, the seal comprising a first seal layer (17a) (e.g., second frit material) and a second seal layer (15b) (e.g., first frit material) ; wherein the second seal layer, overlaps and extends over the first seal layer (abstract, col 7, line 47 – col 8, line 20; figs 2, 5).
Regarding the limitations “wherein the first seal layer comprises first and second substantially coplanar spaced apart seal layer portions each comprising seal material wherein the first and second substantially coplanar seal layer portions are spaced apart from each other so that a space is located between at least the first and second seal layer portions, and wherein the second seal layer portion is located between at least first seal layer portion and the gap at pressure less than atmospheric pressure” and “the second seal layer and/or the third seal layer overlapping at least one of the first and second seal layer portions” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to duplicate the first seal layer or second frit material of Hogan resulting in a second continuous seal layer portion comprising seal material that also surrounds at least the gap as viewed from above, wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are spaced apart from each other as viewed from above so that a space is located between at least the first and second continuous seal layer portions; wherein the second seal layer overlapping at least one of the first and second seal layer portions; since duplication of parts is prima facie obvious (MPEP § 2144.04 VI B). Furthermore, this duplication would come with the added motivation of having two seals, an inner and an outer or a first and second, in case either one or the other were to fail.
Hogan fails to teach wherein each of the first and second seal layer portions comprises a same ceramic material comprising from about 40-70 wt.% tellurium oxide. However, Hogan teaches the use of tellurium oxides and vanadium oxides for frit sealing materials (col 11, lines 27-34; col 16, line 40 – col 17, line 2; col 18, lines 23-49).
Choi teaches a low temperature-calcined lead-free glass frit and paste, and a vacuum glass assembly using the same; wherein the glass frit may be calcined at low temperature, may ensure a low crystallization tendency, proper fluidity and excellent chemical durability and may be applied in a sealing process of tempered glass (para 24); wherein the component TeO2 in the glass frit may improve fluidity of the glass frit, and 30-50 wt% of TeO2 may be included in the glass frit (para 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to substitute the glass frit of Choi for the glass frit of the first and second seal layer portions of Hogan; since substituting known equivalents for the same purpose as recognized in prior art is prima facie obvious (MPEP § 2144.06 II); and, since it is prima facie obvious to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (MPEP § 2144.07). This substitution comes with the additional motivation of using a glass frit that may be calcined at low temperature, may ensure a low crystallization tendency, proper fluidity and excellent chemical durability.
In the alternative, per the teachings of Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the amount of tellurium oxide or TeO2 in the frit of Hogan to optimize the fluidity of the glass frit.
Choi teaches 30-50 wt% of TeO2 may be included in the glass frit (para 27). This range substantially overlaps that of the instant claims. It has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Choi, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claims 35-38 and 45, the duplication of the first seal layer or second frit material of Hogan would have resulted in an embodiment wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are concentric as viewed from above; wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are substantially rectangular in shape as viewed from above; wherein the first continuous seal layer portion surrounds the second continuous seal layer portion as viewed from above; wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are substantially parallel to each other along at least part of at least one side of the panel; wherein the first and second seal layer portions do not physically contact each other at any location in the panel.
Regarding claim 40, Choi teaches wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions each comprise tellurium oxide and vanadium oxide, and by wt.% comprise more tellurium oxide than vanadium oxide (para 25).
Regarding claim 41, Hogan teaches the use of tellurium oxides and vanadium oxides for frit sealing materials (col 11, lines 27-34; col 16, line 40 – col 17, line 2; col 18, lines 23-49). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pick that of TeO3 and TeO4, since it is prima facie obvious to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (MPEP § 2144.07). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to adjust the amount of TeO3 and TeO4 in the first and second continuous seal layers to adjust the physical and mechanical properties of each layer. "[W]here 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." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05 II A).
Regarding claim 46, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the width of each seal as well as the gap between the first and second seal layer portions to optimize the physical and mechanical properties of seals and panel (i.e., weight, overall strength, etc) as well as their ability to seal (e.g., ability to properly seal without overuse of material).
Claims 43 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogan and Choi as applied to claim 42, and further in view of Dennis (US 2012/0213954 A1).
Hogan as modified by Choi teaches the vacuum insulating panels of claim 42. In addition Hogan teaches sealing material frits comprising bismuth oxide (col 4, line 57 – col 5, line 12); as does Choi (para 13)
Hogan as modified by Choi fails to suggest the limitations of claims 18-20 and 25.
Dennis teaches vacuum insulated glass using frit seal materials such as B2O3 (i.e., boron oxide) and Bi2O3 (i.e., bismuth oxide) (para 2, 52, table 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the boron oxide of Dennis with the bismuth oxide frit sealing materials of Hogan as modified by Choi, since it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose (MPEP § 2144.06 I). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to adjust the amount of boron oxide and bismuth oxide in the second seal layer to adjust or optimize the physical and mechanical properties of each layer. "[W]here 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." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP § 2144.05 II A).
Claim 47 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogan et al (US 9,593,527 B2) in view of Choi et al (EP 3 878 824 A1).
Regarding claim 47, Hogan teaches a vacuum insulating panel (e.g., vacuum insulating glass) comprising a first glass substrate (2); a second glass substrate (3); a plurality of spacers (5) provided in a gap between at least the first and second substrates, wherein the gap is at pressure less than atmospheric pressure a seal provided at least partially between at least the first and second substrates, the seal comprising a first seal layer (17a) (e.g., second frit material) and a second seal layer (15b) (e.g., first frit material) ; wherein the second seal layer, overlaps and extends over the first seal layer (abstract, col 7, line 47 – col 8, line 20; figs 2, 5).
Regarding the limitations “wherein the first seal layer comprises first and second substantially coplanar spaced apart seal layer portions each comprising seal material wherein the first and second substantially coplanar seal layer portions are spaced apart from each other so that a space is located between at least the first and second seal layer portions, and wherein the second seal layer portion is located between at least first seal layer portion and the gap at pressure less than atmospheric pressure” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to duplicate the first seal layer or second frit material of Hogan resulting in a second continuous seal layer portion comprising seal material that also surrounds at least the gap as viewed from above, wherein the first and second continuous seal layer portions are spaced apart from each other as viewed from above so that a space is located between at least the first and second continuous seal layer portions; since duplication of parts is prima facie obvious (MPEP § 2144.04 VI B). Furthermore, this duplication would come with the added motivation of having two seals, an inner and an outer or a first and second, in case either one or the other were to fail.
Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the width of each seal as well as the gap between the first and second seal layer portions to optimize the physical and mechanical properties of seals and panel (i.e., weight, overall strength, etc) as well as their ability to seal (e.g., ability to properly seal without overuse of material).
Hogan fails to teach wherein each of the first and second seal layer portions comprises a same ceramic material comprising from about 40-70 wt.% tellurium oxide. However, Hogan teaches the use of tellurium oxides and vanadium oxides for frit sealing materials (col 11, lines 27-34; col 16, line 40 – col 17, line 2; col 18, lines 23-49).
Choi teaches a low temperature-calcined lead-free glass frit and paste, and a vacuum glass assembly using the same; wherein the glass frit may be calcined at low temperature, may ensure a low crystallization tendency, proper fluidity and excellent chemical durability and may be applied in a sealing process of tempered glass (para 24); wherein the component TeO2 in the glass frit may improve fluidity of the glass frit, and 30-50 wt% of TeO2 may be included in the glass frit (para 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to substitute the glass frit of Choi for the glass frit of the first and second seal layer portions of Hogan; since substituting known equivalents for the same purpose as recognized in prior art is prima facie obvious (MPEP § 2144.06 II); and, since it is prima facie obvious to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (MPEP § 2144.07). This substitution comes with the additional motivation of using a glass frit that may be calcined at low temperature, may ensure a low crystallization tendency, proper fluidity and excellent chemical durability.
In the alternative, per the teachings of Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to adjust the amount of tellurium oxide or TeO2 in the frit of Hogan to optimize the fluidity of the glass frit.
Choi teaches 30-50 wt% of TeO2 may be included in the glass frit (para 27). This range substantially overlaps that of the instant claims. It has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Choi, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP § 2144.05).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the instant claims have been considered but are moot due to the new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) in view of a new combination of prior art of record. The Applicant is directed to the 35 USC § 103 section above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN L VAN SELL whose telephone number is (571)270-5152. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur, Generally 7am-6pm.
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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
NATHAN VAN SELL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/NATHAN L VAN SELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783