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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104).
Regarding claim 1, 3-4 : Lehuede et al. teach a glass article comprising a glass substrate, which is noted will implicitly have first and second surfaces, and a porous inorganic layer adhered to the glass substrate having a Tg of ≥450oC, a Ts of ≤ 650oC (abstract, 0034, 0036) and wherein the porous inorganic layer can have less than 1mol% Na2O (see inventive Ex 15 in Table 3 and note that as the claim language recites < 1mol% Na2O, <10mol% Fe2O3 or < 25mol% P2O5, only one of these conditions need to be met to meet the claim).
Lehuede may not directly measure or discuss the porosity of their inorganic layer having < 1mol% Na2O, however, it has been held by the courts that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
In the instant case, as Lehuede clearly suggests that porosity of their layer is a result effective variable that effects ion exchange performance when strengthening their glass as the porosity must be sufficient to permit diffusion of ions through the layer during ion exchange of their glass (0027), suggests desirable porosity values being 16% or even 20% (see for instance Table 7), and discusses that porosity can be adjusted with frit particle size (0038) as well as amount of pigment added to the layer (0039), it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of invention to optimize the level of porosity as desired for ion exchange performance, including desirable porosities of 16% and 20%, and one skilled in the art would clearly recognize the means to do so by adjusting the particle size, pigment contents, etc.
Regarding claim 2: The inorganic layer according to Lehuede can comprise crystallizing glass (ceramic enamel) (0034) and can include pigment (see 0030-0031, 0039).
Regarding claim 10: Given that Lehuede make no mention of their pores being closed and given the fact that Lehuede teaches the function of the pores being such that ions can diffuse through them to the glass during a post ion exchange (see 0027), one skilled in the art would readily conclude at least some of the pores to be open pores.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Singh (USPub20120282407).
As discussed above, Lehuede teaches the invention of claim 1. Lehuede’s layer includes a glass having < 1mol% Na2O but just does not mention additionally comprising at least an oxide of Bi, B, Zn, Si or combination thereof. However, Lehuede’s layer is a decorative glass frit containing layer for coating glass and Lehuede does not appear to place limits on their glass frit composition but instead, suggests that various compositions can be contemplated as long as they achieve the combination of required properties including a Tg of ≥450oC, a Ts of ≤ 650oC and a CTE of between 60-110x10-7 /oC (see first sentence of par 0021). As such, it would be well within the skill in the art to look to the prior art to find other suitable frit compositions achieving the required combination of properties.
In the instant case, given that Singh, who similarly teaches a decorative glass frit containing layers for coating glass, discloses desirable frit compositions for decorative glass layers being that which meet the requirements claimed while also achieve the combination of required properties including a Tg of ≥450oC, a Ts of ≤ 650oC and a CTE of between 60-110x10-7 /oC (see Tables for instance), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include a glass frit in their layer being that according to Singh as desired.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Cleary (USPub20060154085).
As discussed above, Lehuede teaches the invention of claim 1.
Regarding claims 6-7 and 8: Specifically, Lehuede’s inorganic layer is adhered to a surface of a (first) glass substrate which can be borosilicate glass (see entire disclosure).
While Lehuede may not discuss the other conditions claimed, note that Lehuede’s layer is a decorative frit layer on their glass to be used in automotive glazings (abstract, 0003, Lehuede’s claim 30).
As Cleary, who similarly teaches decorative frit layers on glass to be used in automotive glazings, discloses that it is desirable for a first glass having first and second surfaces with a decorative frit layer on the second surface to be in contact with a vinyl PVB layer and laminated via the vinyl layer to a second glass having third and fourth surfaces with an additional decorative frit layer of the same material as the other decorative layer to the third surface (see Figure 5B, 0033-0034, 0041), it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify Lehuede to include their (first) glass having first and second surfaces with their porous decorative frit layer on the second surface to be in contact with a vinyl PVB layer and laminated via the vinyl layer to a second glass having third and fourth surfaces with an additional porous decorative frit layer of the same material to the third surface in order to obtain a desirable automotive glazing.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of either one of (USPub20150037507) or (USPub20140242375).
Regarding claim 9: As discussed above, Lehuede teaches the invention of claim 1 but Lehuede does not teach at least some of the pores being filled with polymerized resin.
However, Lehuede does not exclude the addition of polymer and is generally teaching a decorative porous glass frit layer on glass. Given that ‘507 suggests that decorative porous glass frit layers on glass materials can cause a matte appearance (0007) and suggests that filling pores with a polymer can enhance glossiness (see for instance 0037), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include filling at least some of the pores of their decorative glass layer with polymer for enhanced glossiness.
Alternatively, again, Lehuede does not exclude the addition of polymer and note Lehuede’s layer is a porous glass layer on glass for use in automotive applications. Given that ‘375, who similarly teaches a porous glass layer on glass for use in automotive application, teaches that such pores can be partially filled with a polymer to alter the index of refraction, improve strength, etc. (see 0046, 0048-0049 for instance), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include partially filling their pores with a polymer to alter the index of refraction, improve strength, etc.
Note for the record that while the pores in Lehuede’s porous layer are functioning to allow ions to diffuse through to the underlying glass during Lehuede’s ion exchange step, there is nothing in any of the references to indicate that those pores can not be partially filled as in the above modifications after such ion exchange.
Claim(s) 11-12, 15-16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) in view of Cleary (USPub20060154085).
Regarding claims 11-12, 15 and 16: Lehuede et al. teach an automotive glass comprising a (first) glass substrate, which can be borosilicate or chemically strengthened glass, having first and second surfaces and a porous inorganic layer adhered to the glass substrate. The layer has a Tg of ≥450oC, a Ts of ≤ 650oC (abstract, 0034, 0036) and wherein the porous inorganic layer can have less than 1mol% Na2O (see inventive Ex 15 in Table 3).
While Lehuede may not discuss the other conditions claimed, note that Lehuede’s layer is a decorative frit layer on their glass to be used in automotive glazings (abstract, 0003, Lehuede’s claim 30).
As Cleary, who similarly teaches decorative frit layers on glass to be used in automotive glazing, discloses that it is desirable for such glazings to be multilayer glass laminates and more specifically, for a first glass having first and second surfaces with a decorative frit layer on the second surface to be in contact with a vinyl PVB layer and laminated via the vinyl layer to a second glass having third and fourth surfaces with an additional decorative frit layer of the same material as the first decorative layer to the third surface in contact with the vinyl PVB layer and to apply a urethane adhesive (sealant glue) to the forth major surface for adhering to the automobile (see Figure 5B, 0033-0034, 0041, Cleary’s claims 2 and 4), it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify Lehuede to include their (first) glass having first and second surfaces with their porous decorative frit layer on the second surface to be in contact with a vinyl PVB layer and laminated via the vinyl layer to a second glass having third and fourth surfaces with an additional porous decorative frit layer of the same material to the third surface in contact with the vinyl PVB layer and to apply a urethane adhesive (sealant glue) to the forth major surface for adhering to the automobile in order to obtain a desirable automotive glazing.
Regarding claim 17: The inorganic layer according to Lehuede can comprise crystallizing glass (ceramic enamel) (0034) and can include pigment (see 0030-0031, 0039).
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) and Cleary (USPub20060154085) as applied to claim 11 and 12 in view of either one of (USPub20170008377) or (WO2016196531, rejection using corresponding English document USPub20180215125).
Regarding claims 13 and 14: As discussed above Lehuede teaches the invention of claims 11 and 12. While Lehuede may not mention the second glass being soda lime and the first and second glass substrate having concave and convex surfaces, note that Lehuede as modified by Cleary is an automotive laminated glazing.
As ‘377 and ‘125, who each similarly teach automotive laminated glazings, disclose that the second glass in such glazings can be soda lime and both the first and second glasses can be bent to where each has a concave and convex surface (see 0009, 0035 and Figures in ‘377 and 0037, 0064 and Figures in ‘125), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include the second glass in such glazings can be soda lime and both the first and second glasses can be bent to where each has a concave and convex surface as desired to obtain a desirable automotive laminated glazing.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) and Cleary (USPub20060154085) as applied to claim 11 in view of Singh (USPub20120282407).
. As discussed above, Lehuede teaches the invention of claim 11. Lehuede’s layer includes a glass having < 1mol% Na2O but just does not mention additionally comprising at least an oxide of Bi, B, Zn, Si or combination thereof. However, Lehuede’s layer is a decorative glass frit containing layer for coating glass and Lehuede does not appear to place limits on their glass frit composition but instead, suggests that various compositions can be contemplated as long as they achieve the combination of required properties including a Tg of ≥450oC, a Ts of ≤ 650oC and a CTE of between 60-110x10-7 /oC (see first sentence of par 0021). As such, it would be well within the skill in the art to look to the prior art to find other suitable frit compositions achieving the required combination of properties.
In the instant case, given that Singh, who similarly teaches a decorative glass frit containing layers for coating glass, discloses desirable frit compositions for decorative glass layers being that which meet the requirements claimed while also achieve the combination of required properties including a Tg of ≥450oC, a Ts of ≤ 650oC and a CTE of between 60-110x10-7 /oC (see Tables for instance), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include a glass frit in their layer being that according to Singh as desired.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Lehuede et al. (USPub20160002104) and Cleary (USPub20060154085) as applied to claim 11 in view of either one of (USPub20150037507) or (USPub20140242375).
Regarding claim 19: As discussed above, Lehuede teaches the invention of claim 11 but Lehuede does not teach at least some of the pores being filled with polymerized resin.
However, Lehuede does not exclude the addition of polymer and is generally teaching a decorative porous glass frit layer on glass. Given that ‘507 suggests that decorative porous glass frit layers on glass materials can cause a matte appearance (0007) and suggests that filling pores with a polymer can enhance glossiness (see for instance 0037), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include filling at least some of the pores of their decorative glass layer with polymer for enhanced glossiness.
Alternatively, again, Lehuede does not exclude the addition of polymer and note Lehuede’s layer is a porous glass layer on glass for use in automotive applications. Given that ‘375, who similarly teaches a porous glass layer on glass for use in automotive application, teaches that such pores can be partially filled with a polymer to alter the index of refraction, improve strength, etc. (see 0046, 0048-0049 for instance), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of invention to modify Lehuede to include partially filling their pores with a polymer to alter the index of refraction, improve strength, etc.
Note for the record that while the pores in Lehuede’s porous layer are functioning to allow ions to diffuse through to the underlying glass during Lehuede’s ion exchange step, there is nothing in any of the references to indicate that those pores cannot be partially filled as in the above modifications after such ion exchange.
Regarding claim 20: Given that Lehuede’s article meets that claimed, one skilled in the art would conclude the same properties (MPEP 2112).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN ROBINSON COLGAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3474. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 9AM to 5PM.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
LAUREN ROBINSON COLGAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/LAUREN R COLGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights