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 statement (IDS) submitted on May 23, 2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 4-5 list several compounds having an amount with an endpoint of 0%. Therefore, these compounds are optional and not present in the final composition.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 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.
Claims 1- 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over WO 2022/166028 (hereinafter WO ‘028). The present invention relates to aluminosilicate tempered glass and a preparation method therefor. According to the aluminosilicate tempered glass, one-step strengthening is performed on aluminosilicate glass by using a mixed molten salt of NaNO3 and KNO3. Regarding claims in 4 and 5, in weight percent, the composition of the aluminosilicate glass comprises: 53% to 64% of SiO2, 23% to 28% of Al2O3, 4% to 7% of Li2O, 1.5% to 5.5% of Na2O, 0.01% to 0.8% of K2O, 1% to 5% of MgO, 3.5% to 6% of B2O3, and 0.4% to 3% of ZrO2. Compared with traditional tempered glass, the aluminosilicate tempered glass has more excellent mechanical properties, can pass special performance tests such as drop onto rough ground, ring-in-ring test and four-point bending strength test, and has a lower thermal expansion coefficient (abstract).
In addition, there is a method to introduce a certain amount of Li .sub.2 O on the basis of the above-mentioned traditional cover glass preparation method to prepare high alkali (boron) aluminosilicate glass, and the mainstream composition range in terms of mass percentage is roughly 60%～ 65% SiO .sub.2 , 17%-25% Al .sub.2 O .sub.3 , 2%-4% B .sub.2 O .sub.3 , 3%-6% P .sub.2 O .sub.5 , 10%-16% Na .sub.2 O, 2 %-4% Li .sub.2 O, 0-5% K .sub.2 O, 0-5% MgO and 0-3% ZrO .sub.2 . And carry out a two-step or multi-step ion exchange chemical strengthening process for the high alkali (boron) aluminosilicate glass. By controlling the difference in the molten salt concentration in the first step and the second step, Li-Na and the ion exchange of Na-K can simultaneously obtain a higher compressive stress layer depth and an ideal surface compressive stress value. Improve the drop breaking height of the glass cover, and obtain a protective glass with better mechanical properties and mechanical impact resistance. The surface compressive stress (CS) generally reaches 650MPa and the depth of stress layer (DOL) is 30μm after the above-mentioned high alumina glass is ion-exchanged in pure potassium nitrate molten salt at a temperature of 390℃～450℃ for 2h～8h. On this basis, if the ion exchange time is extended to more than 8h, the depth of the stress layer can be increased to around 60μm, but it is still far from the expected value (such as more than 100μm), and the surface compressive stress value is correspondingly reduced, and it is easy to cause After strengthening, a hard-to-remove alkali-rich layer is formed on the surface of the glass, thereby forming micro-crack defects, which seriously affects the overall strength of the protective cover. Therefore, the one-step ion-exchange chemical strengthening process has a bottleneck in improving the performance of glass. Because the chemically tempered glass of WO ‘028 is made of the same components in the similar amounts as the claimed invention, the various claimed properties as shown in claim 1, claim 2, claim 6, and claim 7 would either have been inherent in the invention of WO ‘028 or obvious over the invention of WO ‘028 motivated by the desire to create a class article that has decreased breakability.
Regarding claim 3, the size and thickness of the above ultra-thin glass can be adjusted arbitrarily according to the needs of end customers of electronic products, the thickness range is 0.2~1.1mm.
Regarding claims 8-13, the aluminosilicate glass is immersed in a mixed molten salt of NaNO .sub.3 and KNO .sub.3 for ion exchange to prepare the aluminosilicate reinforced glass.
The temperature of the ion exchange is 390°C to 460°C.
In one embodiment, the time for the ion exchange is 120 min to 180 min.
At the same time, the aluminosilicate strengthened glass can also maintain a low expansion coefficient. After ion exchange, the internal tensile stress CT value of the glass system is high, the glass network structure is perfect, and the high fracture toughness can suppress the self-explosion problem in the strengthening process. Higher elastic modulus and internal tensile stress can effectively improve the rigidity of glass after strengthening. When used as a protective cover for electronic products, it not only has extremely high impact resistance, but also can effectively improve the overall structural rigidity of electronic products. It can more effectively suppress the deformation of the frame and protect the internal electronic components. The lower expansion coefficient can meet the temperature requirements of the 3D hot bending of the cover glass, and because the expansion rate is close to that of the mold, more complex structures can be made through the 3D mold. 3D glass. At the same time, the aluminosilicate glass can be strengthened in one step by using the mixed molten salt of NaNO .sub.3 and KNO .sub.3. The process flow is simple, and it is easy to control the process with high precision. The strengthening time can be kept below 180min, and the processing efficiency is high.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 110482855 (CN ‘855). The invention claims a silicate glass and preparation method thereof, wherein the mass percent in oxide-based representation, comprising: 65% to 75% of SiO2, 10% to 19% of Al2O3, 4% to 8% of Li2O, 3% to 7% of Na2O, 4% to 8% of MgO, and 1% to 5% of ZrO2. the glass of the invention is combined with a specific secondary ion exchange technique, can effectively control the middle tensile stress value after ultra-thin glass-reinforced, the same thickness of the ultra-thin glass, has a lower CT value, can improve the protective cover plate of shatter-resistant stability (abstract). The glass composition for adjusting, and correspondingly adjusting the ion exchange salt, by one-step composite ion strengthening process, the glass surface compressive stress value should be in the range of 600 to 800MPa, layer depth can be greater than 100μm, 0.5mm of ultra-thin glass intermediate tensile stress not higher than 75MPa, 50~350 degrees centigrade of thermal expansion coefficient not more than 75 * 10-7 degrees centigrade -1, 350~550 degrees centigrade of thermal expansion coefficient not more than 80 * 10-7 degrees centigrade -1. Because the chemically tempered glass of CN ‘855 is made of the same components in the similar amounts as the claimed invention, the various claimed properties as shown in claim 1, claim 2, claim 6, and claim 7 would either have been inherent in the invention of CN ‘855 or obvious over the invention of CN ‘855 motivated by the desire to create a class article that has decreased breakability.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ULA CORINNA RUDDOCK whose telephone number is (571)272-1481. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-4:30 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, Srilakshmi K Kumar can be reached at 571-272-7769. 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.
/ULA C RUDDOCK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729