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 .
The Office Action is in response to the application filed 02/13/2024.
Claim Analysis
Summary of Claim 1:
An antifogging agent composition comprising
a copolymer (A), a colloidal silica (B), and a solvent (C), wherein
the copolymer (A) is a (meth)acrylate copolymer obtained from a monomer mixture containing
a monomer (a-1) represented by General Formula (1):
PNG
media_image1.png
105
219
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[Formula 1]
(in General Formula (1), R1 is a hydrogen atom or a methyl group and R2 and R3 are independently a hydrogen atom or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 4 carbon chains);
a monomer (a-2) represented by General Formula (2):
PNG
media_image2.png
97
233
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[Formula 2]
(in General Formula (2), R4 is a hydrogen atom or a methyl group and R5 is a hydrogen atom or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 8 carbon atoms);
And one or more monomers (a-3) selected from the group consisting of a monomer having a hydroxyl group and being represented by General Formula (3):
PNG
media_image3.png
107
215
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[Formula 3]
(in General Formula (3), R6 is a hydrogen atom or a methyl group and R7 is a linear or branched alkylene group having 1 to 8 carbon atoms),
And a monomer having a hydroxyl group and being represented by General Formula (4):
PNG
media_image4.png
96
215
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[Formula 4]
(in General Formula (4), R8 is a hydrogen atom or a methyl group and R9 is a linear or branched alkylene group having 2 to 8 carbon atoms),
the solvent (C) contains water (C-1);
a monohydric alcohol-based solvent (C-2) having 1 to 4 carbon atoms;
a solvent (C-3) having at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of a ketone group, an ester group, two or more ether groups, a thioketone group, and an amide group in a molecule and having a boiling point of 100°C or more and 200°C or less at 1 atmosphere; and
a glycol ether-based solvent (C-4) represented by General Formula (5):
R10-O-R"-OH
(in General Formula (5), R10 is a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 or more and 8 or less carbon atoms, R1 is a linear or branched alkylene group having 2 or more and 5 or less carbon atoms, and a total number of carbon atoms in R10 and R11 is 3 or more and 12 or less),
a sum of the water (C-1), the solvent (C-2), the solvent (C-3), and the solvent (C-4) is 550 to 1350 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of a sum of the copolymer (A) and the colloidal silica (B), and
a mass ratio ((C-3)/(C-4)) of the solvent (C-3) to the solvent (C-4) is 0.3 to 15.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (JP 2017/165878 A; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Kato”) in view of Shirashi et al. (WO 2019/163918A1; cited in the IDS submitted on 02/13/2024; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Shirashi”) and Kano et al. (JP 2019/156969 A; English translation incorporated herein; hereafter as “Kano”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kato teaches an anti-fogging agent composition [Claim 1; Abstract], corresponding to the antifogging agent composition of Claim 1, comprising:
Acrylic copolymer (A) comprising methyl methacrylate monomers [Claim 1; ¶ 0074], corresponding to the methacrylate copolymer of Claim 1;
Wherein the copolymer (A) contains the following monomers:
Monomer with general formula (M4) [Claim 1], which corresponds with (a-1) monomer of Claim 1;
wherein R7 and R8 of M4 are hydrogen, thereby reading on R1 and R2 of (a-1) are hydrogen of Claim 1;
wherein R9 of M4 is a linear alkyl group having 1-3 carbon atoms, thereby reading on R3 of (a-1) is a linear alkyl group having 1-4 carbon atoms of Claim 1;
PNG
media_image5.png
140
250
media_image5.png
Greyscale
general formula (M4)
Monomer with general formula (M1) [Claim 1], which corresponds with (a-2) monomer of Claim 1;
wherein R1 and R2 of M1 are hydrogen, thereby reading on R4 and R5 of (a-2) are hydrogen of Claim 1;
PNG
media_image6.png
126
305
media_image6.png
Greyscale
general formula (M1);
and
solvent [Claim 1], corresponding to the solvent (C) of Claim 1;
wherein the solvent contains:
water [¶ 0028], corresponding to the water (c-1) of Claim 1;
monohydric alcohol having 2 to 3 carbon atoms [¶ 0010], corresponding to (c-2) a monohydric alcohol-based solvent having 1-4 carbon atoms of Claim 1;
alkyl lactate ester having 1 to 4 carbon atoms [¶ 0010], which has a boiling point of about 150 °C at 1 atm, thereby reading on (c-3) a solvent having an ester group and a boiling point of 100-200 °C at 1 atmosphere of Claim 1;
Propylene glycol monoethyl ether [¶ 0074], corresponding to a glycol ether-based solvent (c-4) of Claim 1;
Wherein a 1 carbon group of the propylene glycol monoethyl ether reads on wherein R10 is a linear 1-8 carbon group of Claim 1;
Wherein a 3 carbon group of the propylene glycol monoethyl ether reads on wherein R11 is a linear 2-5 carbon group of Claim 1;
Wherein the 4 total carbons correspond with R10 + R11 = 3-12 carbon atoms of Claim 1.
However, Kato does not explicitly teach (a-3) monomer of Claim 1; (a-4) monomer of Claim 1; colloidal silica (B) of Claim 1;
C
A
+
B
= 550-1350 parts by mass of solvent with respect to 100 parts by mass of copolymer (A) and colloidal silica (B) of Claim 1; and the mass ratio of (c-3) / (c-4) is 0.3 - 1.5 of Claim 1.
Regarding the ratio of
C
A
+
B
, Kato teaches:
Copolymer is preferably adjusted to < 40 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of 100 parts by weight of the total monomer mixture and solvent, which is equivalent to 40 parts by weight of (A) and 100 parts of (A+C), which is equivalent to A < 40 parts by weight and C > 60 parts by weight, and
C
A
=
>
60
<
40
>
1.5
, which for the purposes of examination will be interpreted to overlap with
C
A
+
B
=
550-1350 of Claim 1.
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have considered the invention to have been obvious because the range taught by Kato for the approximate
C
A
+
B
ratio (>1.5) overlaps the instantly claimed range (550-1350) and is therefore considered to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select any portion of the disclosed ranges including the instantly claimed ranges from the ranges disclosed in the prior art reference, MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding monomers (a-3) and (a-4), Kano teaches an antifogging agent composition [Abstract], comprising a methacrylate copolymer obtained from a monomer mixture comprising:
Monomer with general formula (M4’) [Chemical 4], which corresponds with (a-3) monomer of Claim 1;
wherein R7 of M4’ is hydrogen or a methyl group, thereby reading on R6 of (a-3) is hydrogen or methyl group of Claim 1;
wherein R8 of M4’ is linear alkyene group with 2-4 carbon atoms, thereby reading on R7 of (a-3) is a linear alkyene group with 1-8 carbon atoms of Claim 1;
PNG
media_image7.png
112
340
media_image7.png
Greyscale
general formula (M4’);
Monomer with general formula (M5’) [Chemical 5], which corresponds with (a-4) monomer of Claim 1;
wherein R9 of M5’ is hydrogen or a methyl group, thereby reading on R8 of (a-4) is hydrogen or methyl group of Claim 1;
wherein R10 of M5’ is linear alkyene group with 1-4 carbon atoms, thereby reading on R9 of (a-4) is a linear alkyene group with 2-8 carbon atoms of Claim 1;
PNG
media_image8.png
131
333
media_image8.png
Greyscale
general formula (M5’).
Kano offers the motivation that the monomers can be tailored to improve the durability and performance of the antifog film [¶ 0025, 0027].
Regarding the colloidal silica, Shirashi teaches an antifogging coating film and coating composition comprising methacrylate copolymers, and solvents such as water, ketone solvents, ester solvents, propylene glycol monomethyl ether solvents [Abstract; ¶ 0059-0060, 0064, 0116], and further comprising colloidal silica [Claim 6], which corresponds with the colloidal silica of Claim 1.
Shirashi offers the motivation that colloidal silica is preferred from the viewpoint of ease of handling [¶ 0021].
Kato, Kano Shirashi are considered to be analogous art as the claimed invention, as all are in the same field of methods of preparing antifogging coating compositions comprising methacrylate, amide monomers, organic solvents, and water.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the monomers of Kano and colloidal silica of Shirashi with the antifogging coating composition of Kato, with the motivation to improve handling and performance of the antifog film, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Regarding the mass ratio of (c-3) / (c-4) is 0.3 - 1.5, Kato further teaches use of solvents, such as alkyl lactate ester and propylene glycol monoethyl ether, produces an antifogging agent with lower corrosiveness [¶ 0017]. Kato also teaches transparency of the antifogging coating film is dependent on the amount of solvents, such as alkyl lactate ester and propylene glycol monoethyl ether [¶0062-0063]. Therefore, the amount and ratio of solvents (c-3) and (c-4) can be optimized to reach the desired antifog film properties via a routine optimization. The case law has held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to adjust the amount and ratio of solvents (c-3) and (c-4) for the intended application via a routine optimization, thereby obtaining the present invention.
Regarding Claim 2, Kato further teaches 8-12 % by weight of monomer M1 in the copolymer [¶ 0036], which corresponds with wherein a portion of the monomer (a-2) is 5% to 35% by mass in the monomer mixture.
However, Kato does not explicitly teach wherein a proportion of the monomer (a-1) is 30% to 80% by mass in the monomer mixture.
Nevertheless, Kato teaches the monomer M4, which corresponds with the claimed monomer (a-1), has the function of enhancing the hydrophilicity of the antifogging coating film [¶ 0032]. The case law has held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to adjust the amount monomer M4 for the intended application via a routine optimization, thereby obtaining the present invention.
Regarding Claims 3 and 5, Kato is silent to colloidal silica and therefore silent to the ratio of copolymer to colloidal silica. Nevertheless, Shirashi teaches a mass ratio of silica/copolymer of 100/100 to 300/100 [¶ 0110], which is equivalent to a mass ratio of copolymer/(silica + copolymer) = 100/(200-400) = 25-50 mass %, which corresponds with wherein a proportion of the copolymer (A) in a sum of the copolymer (A) and the colloidal silica (B) is 10% to 50% by mass of Claim 2.
Shirashi offers the motivation that by formulating within this range, an anti-fogging coating with excellent hydrophilicity, antifogging properties, optical properties, and stain resistance can be formed [¶ 0110].
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ratio of copolymer to colloidal silica of Shirashi with the antifogging coating composition of Kato, with the motivation to improve the antifog film, thereby arriving at the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 4 and 6, Kato further teaches use of the antifogging coating for a vehicle light fixture [¶ 0008, 0014], corresponding to the antifogging coating on a base material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DORIS LING whose telephone number is (571)270-3961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, ARRIE LANEE REUTHER can be reached on (571)270-7026. 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.
/DORIS LING/Examiner, Art Unit 1764
/ROBERT C BOYLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights