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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Election
1. This action is in response to the election filed April 16, 2026.
(Group I) Claims 1-12 were provisionally elected rendering (Groups II-III) Claims 13-20 to non-elected inventions.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
2. Applicant's election with traverse of method of making an optical recording medium (Group II) are acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that
the claims of Groups I and II are not mutually exclusive species. Claim 1 is directed to "an automotive glazing assembly" comprising, among other elements, a first glass layer, a second glass layer, a polymer layer bonding the glass layers, at least one sensor device positioned adjacent to the assembly, a localized area in a field of view of the at least one sensor device devoid of the second glass layer and the polymer layer, and a wedge patch comprising a wedge-shaped polymer layer and a glass element. Claim 13 is directed to "an automotive windshield assembly" comprising the same structural elements: a first glass layer, a second glass layer, a polymer layer bonding the glass layers, at least one sensor device positioned adjacent to the assembly, a localized area in front of the at least one sensor device where the second glass layer and the polymer layer are removed, and a wedge patch comprising a wedge-shaped polymer layer with non-uniform thickness that increases in one direction and a glass element. An automotive windshield is a type of automotive glazing. The scope of claim 13 falls within the scope of claim 1. Applicant respectfully submits that these are not mutually exclusive species; they are genus and species, where every windshield assembly meeting claim 13 also meets claim 1. In response to Applicant’s argument,
distinctness is proven for claims in this relationship if the intermediate product is useful to make other than the final product, and the species are patentably distinct (MPEP § 806.05(j)). In the instant case, the intermediate product is deemed to be useful as building material or flooring material and the inventions are deemed patentably distinct because there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Additionally, the search of 2 classes and subclasses would entail the requisite serious burden.
The requirement is deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The references disclosed within the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 4, 2025, May 22, 2026, have been considered and initialed by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
5. Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berard et al. (U.S. 20230202145).
Berard discloses an automotive glazing assembly comprising a first glass sheet with said external main face called F1 and an opposite main face (called F2) and a second glass sheet with said internal main face called F4 interior side of the passenger compartment (and the opposite main face F3), the first and second glass sheets being bonded by a lamination interlayer, particularly acoustic and/or tinted, made of a polymer material particularly organic (particularly thermoplastic) (paragraph 70). Berard further discloses a device comprising a glazed having an inclination defined by an angle α relative to the horizontal in mounted position (in the vehicle), particularly a windshield having a thermal camera, arranged on the internal face side, facing the insert, in such a way as to receive electromagnetic radiation after passage through the insert, the thermal camera comprising a pupil (input), particularly circular, an infrared detection system in the LB range for example by microbolometry, particularly without cryogenic cooling (and an objective lens), the thermal camera being defined by a vertical angle of view θ of at least 10° or 20° and in particular at most 60° or 50° or 40° (paragraph 89) where the objective lens of the camera is interpreted as a glass element. Berard further discloses the camera has a polymeric material component (paragraph 143). Figures 1-2 of Berard shows a wedge patch with a wedge shaped layer having a non-uniformed thickness:
PNG
media_image1.png
418
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, as in claim 1.
Concerning claim 2, Berard shows the first glass layer, second glass layer and polymer layer each a uniform thickness, as shown in Figure 1.
Concerning claim 3, Berard discloses an automotive glazing assembly comprising a first glass sheet with said external main face called F1 and an opposite main face (called F2) and a second glass sheet with said internal main face called F4 interior side of the passenger compartment (and the opposite main face F3), the first and second glass sheets being bonded by a lamination interlayer, particularly acoustic and/or tinted, made of a polymer material particularly organic (particularly thermoplastic) (paragraph 70). Although Berard does not explicitly disclose a plurality of polymer layers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to duplicate the polymer layer, since it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Concerning claim 4, Berard further discloses the camera has a polymeric material component (paragraph 143).
Concerning claim 5, Figures 1-2 of Berard shows a wedge patch with a wedge shaped layer having a non-uniformed thickness:
PNG
media_image1.png
418
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, In claim 5, the phrase, “wherein the wedge patch reduces total internal reflection within the localized area in front of the at least one sensor device within the automotive glazing assembly” is an intended use.
A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963).
Concerning claim 7, Berard discloses a device comprising a glazed having an inclination defined by an angle α relative to the horizontal in mounted position (in the vehicle), particularly a windshield having a thermal camera, arranged on the internal face side, facing the insert, in such a way as to receive electromagnetic radiation after passage through the insert, the thermal camera comprising a pupil (input), particularly circular, an infrared detection system in the LB range for example by microbolometry, particularly without cryogenic cooling (and an objective lens), the thermal camera being defined by a vertical angle of view θ of at least 10° or 20° and in particular at most 60° or 50° or 40° (paragraph 89).
Concerning claim 8, Figures 1-2 of Berard shows where the glazing assembly comprises a curvature and thickness, where the glass element comprises a flat glass element:
PNG
media_image1.png
418
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Concerning claim 9, Figures 1-2 of Berard shows wherein the localized area is defined by a cutout in the second glass layer, and the wedge patch is inserted into the cutout.
PNG
media_image1.png
418
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Concerning claim 11, Figures 1-2 of Berard shows where a dimension of the wedge patch is based on a field of view of the at least one sensor device.
PNG
media_image1.png
418
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 6, 10 and 12 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 closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited automotive glazing assembly further including wherein the wedge-shaped polymer layer is composed of a material selected from the group consisting of Polyvinyl Butyral (PVB), lonomers, and Thermoplastic Polyurethane (TPU).
The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited automotive glazing assembly further including wherein the wedge patch is bonded to the polymer layer by an optically compatible adhesive. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited automotive glazing assembly further including wherein the wedge patch includes a provision for at least one antenna, such that the wedge-shaped polymer layer and the flat glass piece are devoid of metallic coatings in the vicinity of the at least one antenna.
The prior art does not teach motivation or suggestion for modification to make the invention as instantly claimed.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lawrence Ferguson whose telephone number is 571-272-1522. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9:00 AM – 5:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frank Vineis, can be reached on 571-270-1547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/LAWRENCE D FERGUSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights