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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/30/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 3/30/26, 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Any rejections made in the previous action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.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.
Claim 2 is 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 2 recites the limitation "first main surface" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-3, 6-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaussade in view of Li (CN 201720128526 U).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 6, Chaussade teaches a multiple glazed unit for delimiting two spaces with variable difference in pressure (e.g., multiple glazed insulating unit, especially for an aircraft window), comprising at least one first transparent slab (2) (e.g., exterior pane) intended to be in contact with the external atmosphere in the a mounting position of the multiple glazed unit; a second transparent slab (3) (e.g., interior pane), the first transparent slab being separated from the second transparent slab by an air gap (5) with a sealant (4), wherein a peripheral part of the multiple glazed unit is embedded, at least adhesive one film of polymer material (e.g., PET tape or film comprising an adhesive) carrying a layer (e.g., indium oxide doped with tin (ITO) ) of solar-protection (e.g., transparent electrically conductive thin layer) having a main surface of which is functionalized for its adherence for bonding with a substrate (abstract, para 1, 10-11, para 34-52; figs 1-4).
Chaussade teaches the film and transparent electrically conductive thin layer (5) (i.e., adhesive film of polymer) being adhered (i.e., removably adhered) to a main surface of the first transparent slab facing the second transparent slab; wherein the at least one adhesive film of polymer material is adhered to the main surface of the second transparent slab facing the first transparent slab, and positioned such that solar radiation first encounters the layer or the stack of solar-protection layers before the first main surface which is functionalized for its adherence (figs 1-4).
Chaussade further teaches the species of the layers can be on an external face of the glazing unit and in particular on the interior face in the aircraft, especially when a "decorative window treatment" is present (i.e., wherein the at least one adhesive film of polymer material is adhered to the main surface of the second transparent slab opposite the first transparent slab) (para 22).
Chaussade fails to suggest the at least one adhesive film of polymer material is replaceable to modify, adjust and adapt a degree of filtration of solar radiation and/or a solar factor, and/or in the event of damage to the at least one adhesive film.
Li teaches an easily removable solar film comprising a PET base layer, a UV absorbing layer, and a pressure sensitive adhesive for use on glass (page 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the substitute the solar film of Li for the solar-protection layer of Chaussade, 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 comes with the additional motivation of using a solar film that is easily removable in the case of maintenance or repair.
The limitations “to modify, adjust and adapt a degree of filtration of solar radiation and/or a solar factor, and/or in the event of damage to the at least one adhesive film” are future use limitations that do not add any structure to the embodiments of the instant claim.
Regarding claims 7, 8, 18, and 19, Chaussade teaches the first transparent slab (e.g., exterior pane) has a thickness of 9 mm and the second transparent slab (e.g., interior pane) has a thickness of 4 mm (para 40); so Chaussade suggest an embodiment with ranges that lie within the ranges of the instant claims.
Regarding claims 9 and 20, Chaussade teaches pane (2) (i.e., first transparent slab) is PMMA (i.e., acrylic) (para 38).
Regarding claim 10, Chaussade teaches pane (3) (i.e., second transparent slab) is PMMA (i.e., acrylic) (para 38).
Regarding claim 11, Chaussade teaches pane (3) (i.e., second transparent slab) is provided with a small orifice (not shown) (i.e., through-hole) close to seal (4), to ensure that the pressurization of the aircraft is applied on external pane (i.e., first transparent slab ) (i.e., wherein the second transparent slab comprises a through-hole of small, controlled diameter, so that the air gap is at the same pressure as the volume delimited by the multiple glazed unit on the side opposite the first transparent slab) (para 44, fig 2).
Regarding claim 12, Chaussade teaches the species of the first pain being a laminated glass plates (e.g., a sheet of polyvinylbutyral (PVB) or of polyurethane (PU) sandwiched between two sheets of PMMA) (i.e., comprising a third constituent that forms the main surface thereof opposite the first transparent slab) (para 7, 15, 23).
Regarding claims 14-16, Chaussade teaches a method comprising providing a multiple glazed unit according to claim 1, as a glazed unit of a volume subject to pressurization; wherein the glazed unit is an aeronautical glazed unit; wherein the glazed unit is a passenger cabin window (title, abstract, para 35, 44; fig 1-4).
Regarding claim 17, the limitations of the instant claim are an intended use and do not add further structure to the claims. However, Chaussade teaches the glazed unit is a passenger cabin window (i.e., wherein the multiple glazed unit is for delimiting an enclosure subject to pressurization) (title, abstract, para 35, 44; fig 1-4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaussade and Li as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Bertolini (US 2016/0011483 A1).
Chaussade as modified by Li teaches the multiple glazed unit of claim 12. Chaussade as modified by Li further teaches the third constituent is PMMA) (para 7, 15, 23).
Chaussade as modified by Li fails to suggest the third constituent supports electrochromic function.
Bertolini teaches switchable windows for use in aircraft comprising an electrochromic film; wherein an electrical ac voltage is applied across the electrochromic film, a change of the color or light transmittance of the film occurs; wherein the electrochromic film is positioned between two PMMA or two polycarbonate (PC) sheets (para 2, 4, 5, 20, 29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention, per the teachings of Bertolini, to use an electrochromic film between the PC sheets of the external laminate pane of Chaussade as modified by Li (i.e., the third constituent supports electrochromic function), so when an electrical ac voltage is applied across the electrochromic film, a change of the color or light transmittance of the film occurs.
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 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
Prosecution Insights