Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/663,711

VIBRATOR-ATTACHED VEHICULAR WINDOW GLASS AND VIBRATOR-ATTACHED VEHICULAR WINDOW GLASS SYSTEM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 14, 2024
Examiner
TATE-SIMS, CRISTI J
Art Unit
1711
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Agc INC.
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
586 granted / 706 resolved
+18.0% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
730
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
56.3%
+16.3% vs TC avg
§102
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 706 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-7, filed January 2, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wu (CN 108082127 A machine translation). Wu is directed towards a rain wiping system that teaches an ultrasonic emitter can generate 30 Hz of ultrasonic wave to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud.[page 3] Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 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 for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-9 and 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trevett (US 2018/0250722), and in further view of Wu (CN 108082127 A machine translation). Regarding claim 1, Trevett figures 1-10 teach a vibrator-attached vehicular window glass, comprising: a vehicular window glass (10 windscreen) comprising a first glass plate (21 glass sheet) comprising a first main surface (23 coating layer, 49 hydrophobic layer) with a water repellent coating; and a first vibrator (1-8 transducer, 13 generator) configured to apply a vibration to the first glass plate. [0028-35][0047] Trevett is silent to the first vibrator is configured to vibrate at an excitation frequency of 10 Hz to 20,000 Hz. Wu is directed towards a rain wiping system that teaches an ultrasonic emitter can generate 30 Hz of ultrasonic wave to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud.[page 3] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide an ultrasonic emitter as taught in Wu to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud.[page 3] Regarding claim 2, figure 2 teaches the first vibrator is attached to a second main surface (24 bonding layer) opposite to the first main surface of the first glass plate. Regarding claim 3, figures 1A teaches the vehicular window glass is attached to a vehicle, the first vibrator (1, 4 transducer) is attached in a vicinity of an upper side of the first glass plate. Regarding claim 4, figure 1A teaches the first vibrator (2, 3 transducer) is attached in a vicinity of a center portion of the upper side of the first glass plate. Regarding claim 5, Trevett teaches the front window or windscreen of a vehicle such as a car is inclined, for example, at an angle of 34°. The angle may be greater. Some vehicles have windscreens inclined at a greater angle, for example 35° or more thereby reading on the vehicular window glass is attached to a vehicle, an inclination angle of the first glass plate with respect to a horizontal surface is 5° to 175°. Regarding claim 6, Trevett figures 1-10 teach a vibrator-attached vehicular window glass system, comprising: the vibrator-attached vehicular window glass according to claim 1; and a second vibrator (plurality of transducers 1-8) different from the first vibrator, wherein a sound pressure generated from a diaphragm ( 20 laminate layer) provided with the second vibrator is controlled to cancel a sound pressure generated from the first glass plate provided with the first vibrator, as the laminate layer within a vehicle windscreen is highly attenuating to ultrasonic waves and causes a damping effect.[0035-36] Regarding claim 7, Trevett teaches Each transducer is driven by the frequency generator 13 and power amplifier 14 of FIG. 1B to emit a range of frequencies. The range of frequencies or bandwidth of frequencies emitted may be fixed and chosen by the designer. Alternatively the frequencies or bandwidth may be chosen by an operator thereby suggesting the first vibrator and the second vibrator are connected to a phase control device.[0031] Trevett further teaches a controller responsive to the sensor for controlling the operation of the system or apparatus thereby suggesting the operator is capable to choose frequencies such that the phase control device has a phase of a sound of the first vibrator that is inverted from a phase of a sound of the second vibrator.[0031][0005][0029] Regarding claim 8, Trevett teaches each transducer is driven by the frequency generator 13 and power amplifier 14 of FIG. 1B to emit a range of frequencies thereby suggesting the first vibrator and the second vibrator are branched from the phase control device and connected to each other.[0031] Regarding claim 9, Trevett teaches the power efficiency of the system may be optimised, since about two thirds of the energy can be transferred or lost as heat. Acoustic losses may include scattering or absorption within the system, for example at glass impurities or defects. To prevent heating effects, the circuitry and materials such as the transducers on the window may be optimised for impedance matching. An impedance matching circuit (60) which matches the electrical impedance of the power amplifier (14) of the driving circuit to the impedance of the transducers (1-8). This improves the efficiency of the power circuit or system as a whole and reduces loss of energy from the system thereby suggesting a sound pressure of the first vibrator and a sound pressure of the second vibrator are substantially the same to be an obvious modification.[0050-51] Regarding claim 11, Trevett figure 4 teaches the vehicular window glass comprises a second glass plate (22 glass sheet). Trevett teaches hydrophobic coating reduces surface tension by changing the contact angle between the droplet and the windscreen surface. The air flow over the surface of the windscreen may also assist in removing precipitation from the windscreen thereby suggesting a first main surface with a water repellent coating to be an obvious modification.[0047] Trevett is silent to the second vibrator is configured to vibrate at an excitation frequency of 10 Hz to 100,000 Hz. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have the first vibrator configured to vibrate at an excitation frequency of 10 Hz to 100,000 Hz through routine optimization and experimentation as Trevett teaches ultrasonic waves to remove precipitation from the surface of a window. In general, ultrasonic waves are acoustic waves with a frequency above 100 kiloHertz (kHz).[0026] Regarding claim 12, figure 1A suggests the second vibrator is attached to a second main surface opposite to the first main surface of the second glass plate. Regarding claim 13, Trevett teaches the front window or windscreen of a vehicle such as a car is inclined, for example, at an angle of 34°. The angle may be greater. Some vehicles have windscreens inclined at a greater angle, for example 35° or more thereby reading on the vehicular window glass is attached to a vehicle, an inclination angle of the second glass plate with respect to a horizontal surface is 5° to 175°.[0025] Regarding claim 14, figure 1 teaches wherein the first glass plate and the second glass plate are a combination selected from a rear window, a windshield (10 windscreen), a roof glazing, and a side window. Regarding claim 15, Wu teaches an ultrasonic emitter can generate 30 Hz of ultrasonic wave to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud thereby suggesting the excitation frequency is 10 Hz to 1,000 Hz.[page 3] Regarding claim 16, Wu teaches an ultrasonic emitter can generate 30 Hz of ultrasonic wave to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud thereby suggesting wherein the excitation frequency is 20 Hz to 1,000 Hz.[page 3] Regarding claim 17, Wu teaches an ultrasonic emitter can generate 30 Hz of ultrasonic wave to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud thereby suggesting wherein the excitation frequency is 30 Hz to 200 Hz.[page 3] Regarding claim 18, Wu teaches an ultrasonic emitter can generate 30 Hz of ultrasonic wave to facilitate removing impurities such as rain and mud thereby suggesting wherein the excitation frequency is 30 Hz to 100 Hz.[page 3] Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trevett (US 2018/0250722) and Wu (CN 108082127 A machine translation, as applied to claim 6, and in further view of Pascoe (US 2015/0298656 cited in IDS). Regarding claim 10, Trevett is silent to the second vibrator comprises an audio speaker. Pascoe is directed towards an acoustical and rain clearing window assembly for a vehicle having an audio speaker for a cabin of a vehicle or clear water off a panel of the vehicle.[0006] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide an audio speaker as taught in Pascoe to clear water from a panel of the vehicle. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trevett (US 2018/0250722) and Wu (CN 108082127 A machine translation, as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Ueda (JP 2019058474A machine translation). Regarding claim 19, Trevett in view of Wu is silent to the vehicular window glass is a front side window that slides up and down and the first vibrator is disposed so as to have an intensity distribution that excites a region in front of the vehicular window glass more strongly when the vehicular window glass is attached to a vehicle. Ueda is directed towards a deposit removal device for a vehicle wherein figures 1-2 teach the front door glass 41 is a movable glass that can be raised and lowered with respect to the front door 40.[page 3] Ueda teaches front door glass 41, which is an exterior member, is formed by vibrating the input surface portion 123 having a predetermined sharp angle θ and the vibration transmitting portion 120 having the exciting surface portion 121 with the vibration generating portion 110 having a piezoelectric body. It is possible to generate a surface wave that travels with directivity along a predetermined traveling direction, and an effective and locally effective removal effect of deposits at a specific part of the exterior member in the traveling direction of the surface wave.[page 6] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide vehicular window glass is a front side window that slides up and down and the first vibrator is disposed so as to have an intensity distribution that excites a region in front of the vehicular window glass more strongly when the vehicular window glass is attached to a vehicle as taught in Ueda for effective removal effect of deposits at a specific part of the exterior member in the traveling direction of the surface wave.[page 6] 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 CRISTI J TATE-SIMS whose telephone number is (571)272-1722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm. 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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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. CRISTI J. TATE-SIMS Primary Examiner Art Unit 1711 /CRISTI J TATE-SIMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 14, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 02, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 09, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603537
CLOTHES TREATMENT APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595610
SYSTEM FOR DETECTING THE POSITION OF A WASHING MACHINE SUBWASHER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595614
CLOTHES TREATMENT APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595619
LAUNDRY TREATING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593649
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TREATING SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+15.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 706 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month