DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2024 being considered by the examiner. A copy of initialed form is attached for Applicant’s record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claims 32, 34, 35, 41-46 and 49 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash).
Regarding claim 32, Ash discloses an insulated glass unit, in figure 9, comprising:
a first substantially transparent substrate (34)(figure 9);
a second substantially transparent substrate (44) (figure 9);
an optically switchable device (an electrochromic medium 49 in electrical contact with layers 36 and 38) disposed on one of the first and second substantially transparent substrates (34, 44)(figure 9);
a spacer sandwiched between the first and second substantially transparent substrates (column 23, lines 41-46);
a secondary seal (58)(figure 9) outside an outer perimeter of the spacer; and wiring (41,43)(figure 9), wherein at least a portion of the wiring is in the secondary seal (58)(figure 9).
Regarding claim 34, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. Ash further discloses wherein the optically switchable device (an electrochromic medium 49 in electrical contact with layers 36 and 38) is an electrochromic device (col.22, lines 66-67).
Regarding claim 35, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. Ash further discloses wherein at least a portion of the wiring passes out of the insulated glass unit (figure 9).
Regarding claim 41, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. Ash further discloses wherein the spacer comprises a metal, a foam material, a polymeric material, a plastic material, or a hard rubber material (col.23, line 53).
Regarding claim 42, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. Ash further discloses wherein the insulated glass unit (47, 32) is installed in a frame or a curtain wall (“frames”)(col. 29, lines 64-67)(figure 9).
Regarding claim 43, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. Ash further discloses wherein the wiring is electrically connected to a window controller (see figure 3)(col.5, lines 26-29).
Regarding claim 44, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 43. Ash further discloses wherein wherein the wiring is also electrically connected to a power supply (figure 3)(col. 9, lines 35-43).
Regarding claim 45, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 43. Ash further discloses wherein the window controller is electrically connected to one or more sensors (figures 3 and 5)(col. lines 8-22).
Regarding claim 46, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 45 with said sensor (621/622/623/624) located on user input area (60/62)(figures 2 and 8) and mounting frame (30) as seen in figure 9, except for location of the sensor to be in frame. However, location of the user input area does not change/effect overall functionality of the device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to install the user input area on the frame or elsewhere since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 49, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32 with the wires, but does not disclose wherein said wires is flat. Since both wires and flat wires function for conducting electricity, the selection of flat wires in place of wires seems to be design experience to optimum the performance, since it has been held to be within the general skill of worker in the art to select a known display on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as master of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 33 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash) as applied to claim 32 above, in view of Agrawal (US 6,795226 of record).
Regarding claim 33, Ash disclose the insulated glass unit of claim 32, with the wiring . However, Ash does not disclose wherein the wiring is in electrical connection with one or more bus bars disposed on the optically switchable device.
Agrawal is in same field of endeavor and teaches wherein the electrochromic window comprises a transparent substrate with an electrochromic device thereon and a bus bar in electrical connection with a conductive layer of the electrochromic device, and an electrical connection with the bus bar of the electrochromic window through a seal in the insulated glass unit via the wiring harness, and wherein the window controller is configured to power reversible optical transitions of the electrochromic window by delivering power to the bus bar (Fig 2B, 2C and 3A; col. 12, lines 5-30).
Therefore at the time the invention was made, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above electro-optical structure control system, as taught by Ash, and incorporating the busbar connection features, as taught by Agrawal. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to increase the transmission ranges required by various locations, as suggested by Agrawal (col.2, lines 20-25).
Claims 36-38 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash) as applied to claim 32 above, in view of Cho et al. (US 20050166495 A1).
Regarding claim 36, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. However, Ash does not disclose wherein the wiring passes through an interior volume of the spacer and through the secondary seal to an exterior of the insulated glass unit.
Cho et al. is in same field of endeavor and teaches a wiring (wires 5, figure 4) passes through an interior volume of the spacer and through the secondary seal to an exterior of the insulated glass unit (par.[0015]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to applied teaching of Cho et al. to device of Ash for purpose of connecting EC device to a power supply.
Regarding claim 37, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. However, Ash does not disclose wherein the wiring passes through the spacer.
Cho et al. is in same field of endeavor and teaches, in figure 4, wherein wiring (wires 5, figure 4) passes through the spacer (31) (par.[0015]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to applied teaching of Cho et al. to device of Ash for purpose of connecting EC device to a power supply.
Regarding claim 38, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. However, Ash does not disclose wherein the wiring passes through the secondary seal to an exterior of the insulated glass unit.
Cho et al. is in same field of endeavor and teaches, in figure 4, wherein wiring (5) passes through the secondary seal (not number, par.[0015]) to an exterior of the insulated glass unit (par.[0015]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to applied teaching of Cho et al. to device of Ash for purpose of connecting EC device to a power supply.
Claim 39 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash) in view of Cho et al. as applied to claim 38 above, in view of Johnson (US 20060283084 A1).
Regarding claim 39, Ash and Cho discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 38 with the secondary seal. However, neither Ash not Cho discloses wherein the wiring is in electrical connection in the secondary seal with one or more bus bars disposed on the optically switchable device.
Johnson is in same field of endeavor and teaches, in figures 2, 9 and 15, wherein the wiring (118) is in electrical connection in the secondary seal (spacer/seal) with one or more bus bars (106/310/902/1500) disposed on the optically switchable device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to applied teaching of Johnson to device of Ash and Cho et al. for purpose of connecting EC device to a power supply.
Claim 40 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash) as applied to claim 32 above, in view of Varaprasad et al.(US 6,954,300).
Regarding claim 40, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32. However, Ash does not disclose wherein the secondary seal is a polymeric material.
Varaprasad et al. is in same field of endeavor and teaches wherein the secondary seal isC a polymeric material (see claim 11; “a boundary seal made from a polymeric material”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to applied teaching of Varaprasad et al. to device of Ash for purpose of sealing EC device.
Claim 47 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash) as applied to claim 32.
Regarding claim 47, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32 with wires, but does not explicitly state that wiring comprises a conductive metal core covered with an insulating material. The use of general material for wiring and insulation material are well known in the art of optical mirror for the purpose of supplying, lowering down manufacture and labor cost. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use wirings having conductive core and insulating material around the conductive core in Ash’s device for the purpose of lowering down manufacture and labor cost, as well as preventing short circuit.
Claim 48 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ash et al.(US 7990603 B2 of record, hereinafter Ash) as applied to claim 32 above, in view of Benson (US 5384653 A of record).
Regarding claim 48, Ash discloses the insulated glass unit of claim 32 with the wiring and sealing and spacer. However, Ash does not disclose wherein the wiring passes through a seal between a body of the spacer and at least one of the first and second substantially transparent substrates. Benson is in same field of endeavor and teaches, in figure 4, the wiring (31) passes through a seal between a body of the spacer (46) and substantially transparent substrate (12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to applied teaching of Benson to device of Ash for purpose of connecting EC device to a power supply.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYEN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2343. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at 571-272-2713. 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.
/TUYEN TRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872