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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yano (WO 2019102635).
Considering claim 1, Yano (Figure 2) teaches a transparent conductive piezoelectric laminated film comprising: a piezoelectric film (10 + 12 + 14 + page 2 second paragraph); and a conductor layer (18 + page 6 first paragraph) layered on at least one surface of the piezoelectric film, wherein the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film has a diffraction peak in each of a range of 21 degrees + 2 degrees and a range of 31 degrees + 2 degrees in X-ray diffraction measurement (14 + page 3 first paragraph + It has been held that where the structure recited in a reference is the same as the claimed structure, claimed properties and functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433)) and the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film has a haze value of 2.0% or less (page 4 second paragraph + It has been held that where the structure recited in a reference is the same as the claimed structure, claimed properties and functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433)).
Considering claim 2, Yano (Figure 2) teaches wherein the conductor layer (18 + page 4 fourth paragraph) comprises indium or an indium compound and a metal other than indium and tin or a compound of the metal (page 4 fourth paragraph).
Considering claim 3, Yano teaches wherein a diffraction of the diffraction peak in each of the range of 21 degrees + 2 degrees and the range of 31 degrees + is 100 cps or more (page 4 second paragraph + It has been held that where the structure recited in a reference is the same as the claimed structure, claimed properties and functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433)).
Considering claim 4, Yano teaches wherein a surface resistance measured from the conductor layer side is 200Ώ/sq or less (It has been held that where the structure recited in a reference is the same as the claimed structure, claimed properties and functions are presumed to be inherent (In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433)).
Considering claim 5, Yano (Figure 2) teaches wherein the piezoelectric film (10 + 12 + 14 + page 2 second paragraph) comprises a fluorine-based resin (page 3 first paragraph).
Considering claim 6, Yano (Figure 2) teaches comprising a transparent coating (26a + page 6 third paragraph) layer on a surface of the piezoelectric film, the surface on the conductor layer side.
Considering claim 7, Yano (Figure 2) teaches a device comprising the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film (25 + page 6 second paragraph).
Considering claim 8, Yano (Figure 2) teaches a method of manufacturing the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film, the method comprising: forming a conductor layer (18 + page 6 first paragraph) on at least one surface of a transparent piezoelectric film (10 + 12 + 14 + page 2 second paragraph) comprising a fluorine (page 3 first paragraph) based resin to obtain a laminate film; and annealing the laminate film obtained in step (A) at 85 to 130 degrees Celsius (The method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight).
Considering claim 9, Yano (Figure 2) teaches the method of manufacturing the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film wherein in step (A), before the conductor layer is formed, a transparent coating layer (26a + page 6 third paragraph) is formed on a surface of the transparent piezoelectric film (10 + 12 + 14 + page 2 second paragraph), the surface on the side of forming the conductor layer and the conductor layer is formed on the transparent coating layer (The method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight).
Considering claims 10, 13 and 16, Yano teaches a device the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film (25 + page 6 second paragraph).
Considering claims 11, 14 and 17, Yano (Figure 2) teaches a method of manufacturing the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film, the method comprising: forming a conductor layer (18 + page 6 first paragraph) on at least one surface of a transparent piezoelectric film (10 + 12 + 14 + page 2 second paragraph) comprising a fluorine (page 3 first paragraph) based resin to obtain a laminate film; and annealing the laminate film obtained in step (A) at 85 to 130 degrees Celsius (The method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight).
Considering claims 12, 15 and 18, Yano (Figure 2) teaches the method of manufacturing the transparent conductive piezoelectric laminate film wherein in step (A), before the conductor layer is formed, a transparent coating layer (26a + page 6 third paragraph) is formed on a surface of the transparent piezoelectric film (10 + 12 + 14 + page 2 second paragraph), the surface on the side on which the conductor layer is to be formed and the conductor layer is formed on the transparent coating layer (The method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN P GORDON whose telephone number is (571)272-5394. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 4:30 p.m..
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, Dedei K Hammond can be reached at 571-270-7938. 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.
/BRYAN P GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
