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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 6/22/2026, 6/22/2026, and 7/13/2026 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 30 should end with a period (“.”). Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21 and 32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over respective combination of claims (1 & 11) and (15 & 19) of U.S. Patent No. 11,953,439. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of the indicated claims of the current application are disclosed in the respective combination of claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,953,439 and are therefore anticipated by said claims.
US Patent 11,953,439
Current Application
1. An article, comprising:
11. The article of claim 1, wherein the article exhibits structural coloration due to the total internal reflection
1 (continued). a first component and a second component adjacent the first component; and a curved microscale interface between the first component and the second component, the interface configured such that at least a portion of electromagnetic radiation incident to a surface of the interface undergoes total internal reflection between the first component and the second component, wherein the first component has a first refractive index greater than a second refractive index of the second component; and wherein the electromagnetic radiation undergoes a change in amplitude during total internal reflection.
21. (New) A method of forming
an article that exhibits structural color, the method comprising:
forming on or within the article a curved, microscale interface between a first component and a second component adjacent to the first component, wherein the interface is configured such that at least a portion of electromagnetic radiation incident to a surface of the interface undergoes total internal reflection between the first component and the second component; wherein the first component has a first refractive index greater than a second refractive index of the second component; and wherein the electromagnetic radiation undergoes a change in amplitude during the total internal reflection.
15. An article, comprising:
19. The method of claim 15, wherein the article exhibits structural coloration due to the total internal reflection
15 (continued). a plurality of domed structures formed on a substrate, the substrate comprising a first material;
a second component adjacent the plurality of domed structures and comprising a second material;
wherein the first material has a refractive index greater than a refractive index of the second material, such that incident electromagnetic radiation undergoes total internal reflection at a curved surface of each domed structure at a microscale interface between the first material and the second material.
32. (New) A method of forming
an article that exhibits structural color,
the method comprising: forming on or within the article a plurality of domed structures on a substrate, wherein the substrate comprises a first material;
and positioning a second component adjacent the plurality of domed structures, wherein the second component comprises a second material;
wherein the first material has a refractive index greater than a refractive index of the second material, such that incident electromagnetic radiation undergoes total internal reflection at a curved surface of each domed structure at a microscale interface between the first material and the second material.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-31 and 33-45 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claims 22 and 23: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the curved, microscale interface is formed by a process that includes lithography, stamping, imprinting, indentation, replica molding, polymerization of fluids, assembly of solid particles, or any combination thereof.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 24: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the curved, microscale interface is formed by a process that comprises fabricating a template for the interface, applying a curable polymer to the template; curing the polymer; and removing the cured polymer from the template.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 25: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the curved, microscale interface is concave relative to the incident electromagnetic radiation.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 26: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the first component or the second component comprises a fluid.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claims 27 and 28: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the first component comprises a polymer.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 29: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the curved, microscale interface exhibits a largest cross-sectional dimension of from 1 micron to 200 microns.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 30: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the article exhibits iridescence due to the total internal reflection.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 31: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the article exhibits optical interference due to the total internal reflection.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claims 33 and 34: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the plurality of domed structures is formed by a process that includes lithography, stamping, imprinting, indentation, replica molding, polymerization of fluids, assembly of solid particles, or any combination thereof.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 35: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the plurality of domed structures is formed by a process that comprises fabricating a template for the plurality of domed structures, applying a curable polymer to the template; curing the polymer; and removing the cured polymer from the template.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 36: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the domed structures comprise hemicylindrical structures.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 37: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the domed structures comprise hemispherical structures.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 38: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the plurality of domed structures are disposed in a regular two-dimensional array on the substrate.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 39: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the microscale interface comprises a polygonal interface.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 40: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the microscale interface comprises an irregular interface.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 41: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the plurality of domed structures each exhibit a largest cross-sectional dimension of from 1 micron to 200 microns.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 42: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the electromagnetic radiation undergoes a change in amplitude during total internal reflection.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 43: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the article exhibits structural coloration due to the total internal reflection.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 44: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the article exhibits iridescence due to the total internal reflection.
The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 45: a method as claimed, specifically wherein the article exhibits optical interference due to the total internal reflection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant has not filed a Terminal Disclaimer in response to the Double Patenting rejection disclosed in the Office Action filed 12/8/2025. Therefore, the rejection has not been overcome and is made FINAL.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 WILLIAM C CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-2324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
/WILLIAM CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 July 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights