DETAILED ACTION
In response to Amendments/Arguments filed 3/4/2026. Claims 1-10 are pending. Claims 1 and 10 were amended. Claim 11 was cancelled.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engardio et al. (US 20100249265) in view of Sugizaki et al. (JP 2002-167552).
Engardio discloses scratch resistant coatings with improved adhesion to inorganic thin film coatings. Concerning claims 1-3 and 5, Engardio discloses the scratch resistant coating is disposed on a substrate and an inorganic antireflective film vapor deposited on the scratch resistant coating, wherein the scratch resistant coating is formed from a composition comprising a binder resin that is a (meth)acrylic monomer or oligomer and a polysilsesquioxane at a content of at least 10 wt% of the composition and the vapor deposited inorganic antireflective film is the dry film (para. 0012-0027 and 0039). The substrate can be a plastic article that includes sheet and films (para. 0001). Given that the materials are the same, amounts the same, and the layers as disclosed by Engardio are in the same structural location, abundance ratio as claimed would be within the claimed ranges. However, Engardio is silent to the claimed substrate thickness and coating thickness. Regarding claims 4 and 6, Engardio discloses that new classes of silica nanoparticles that are functionalized can be added to improve the adhesion of the AR coating (para. 0012).
In regards to claim 8, the inorganic antireflective film comprises alternating layers of low and high refractive index materials (para. 0009). However, Engardio is silent to the claimed substrate thickness, shape, coating thickness and outdoor use.
Sugizaki discloses a plastic article with a hard coating formed from a silsesquioxane resin, wherein the plastic article comprises a plastic sheet (or plate) substrate having a thickness of 0.1 to 20 microns and the plastic substrate has a thickness of 10 to 1000 microns for use as a window film and is used in outdoor applications (para. 0003, 0015, and 0050-0059). The thickness of the hard coating has thickness from 0.1 to 20 microns to provide adequate effect of the coating and the thickness of the plastic film is from 10 to 1000 microns for use as window film for outdoor applications (para. 0059 and 0052). As such, for the applications as set forth above, one of ordinary skill in the art to have a plastic substrate having the thickness as claimed and the hard coating having a thickness as claimed for adequate effect of the coating and for handling.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 4-5, filed 3/4/2026, with respect to the 35 USC 102(a)(1) and 103 rejection under Engardio and Engardio in view of Igami have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of the claims has been withdrawn. However, it is noted that Engardio is still applicable as the primary reference in an obviousness rejection as shown above. With respect to Engardio, Applicant asserts that a molded lens body is different from a sheet or film, Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that a molded film body is still a curved sheet which would still meet the limitations of a sheet or film. Nevertheless, Examiner notes that Engardio discloses the coating structure is useful for plastic articles broadly which can include sheets and films and different applications from lens applications (para. 0001). As such, Engardio is still applicable as shown above.
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 PRASHANT J KHATRI whose telephone number is (571)270-3470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6:30PM.
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, 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.
PRASHANT J. KHATRI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/PRASHANT J KHATRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783