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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/13/2026 has been entered.
The status of the claims is as follows: claims 1, 4, 5, 13, 15-18 are amended; claims 6, 9, 19, 34, 35, 39 and 40 are cancelled; claims 25-33, 36-38, 41-53 are withdrawn; resulting claims 1-5, 7, 8, 10-18 and 20-24 pending for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (KR 10-2017-0047070, cited on IDS and ISR; machine translation previously provided.
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches a radome for a vehicle having a first side and a second side, comprising a substrate (10; radio-transmissive and visually-transparent substrate) formed of a transparent material such as injection molded polycarbonate resin; an opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) comprised of an acrylic resin, black pigment, solvent and other additives substrate (10; radio-transmissive and visually-transparent substrate) on a first side of the a substrate (10; radio-transmissive
and visually-transparent substrate); a primer layer (30; hard-coat layer) comprised of an acrylic resin covering at least a portion of the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer); and a decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) comprised of 5-30% by weight of metallic pigment including indium applied to the primer layer(30; hard-coat layer) as shown in Figure 4 reproduced below (Figure 4; [0007-0011, 0019-0037, 0055- 0070, 0075-0079]).
Kim further teaches that the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) has areas that are removed to form openings (voids), such that a portion of the radome is void of the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) ([0068-0070]). Kim additionally teaches that the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) comprises a portion with one or more removal areas (41; voids), so the shape of the radome as viewed from the outside of the radome has a sense of unity with the emblem or front grill of the part where the radome is installed ([066-0068]).
As shown in Figure 4, a portion of the openings formed in the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) and a portion of the removal areas (41; voids) of the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) are aligned with one another, forming co-aligned voids through both the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) and the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) ([0066-0075]).
Regarding the phrases "radio-transmissive and visually transparent" with respect to the substrate and "radio-transmissive" with respect to the layer comprising metal and/or metal alloy and "visually-opaque", Kim include materials that are also disclosed by the instant application for the respective layers (see pg-pub [00119-0152]), therefore, would comprise the same properties. It has been held that products of identical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties, therefore, if the prior art teaches the same structure as claimed, the properties the applicant discloses are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01(II). As Kim teaches materials disclosed by the instant application, the claimed properties of the layer would necessarily be present in the layers of Kim.
Response to Arguments
Response-Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejections of claims 1-5, 7, 8, 10-18, and 20-24 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention are overcome by Applicants amendments to claims 1, 4, 15-18 in the response filed 08/13/2026.
Response-Prior Art
Applicant's arguments filed 08/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As no prior art rejections were made in the previous office action due to the number of indefiniteness rejections, the Examiner stated that previously applied prior art to Kim et al. (KR-2017-0047070) and Bicego (US 2020/03398053) may be applied later in prosecution depending on the Applicant arguments.
The Applicant argues on page 12 of the response filed 08/13/2026 that neither Kim no Bicego, either alone or in combination, teach each and every limitation of either independent claim 1 or 4 as amended as explained in the previous office action response (see 01/22/2026). This argument is not persuasive.
Kim et al. is used in the rejection of claim 4 above, and the Applicant argues on page 14 of the response filed 01/22/2026 that the reference does not disclose a “continuous” metal layer but rather a layer having 5 to 30 wt% of a metallic pigment, nor does the reference teach that the void portion of the primary visually opaque layer is co-aligned with the voids in the radio transmissive layer. These arguments are not persuasive.
The claims no longer recite “continuous” with respect to the metal layer or metal alloy layer, therefore this argument is moot. As stated in the rejection of claim 4 over Kim et al. above, Figure 4 illustrates and embodiment wherein a portion of the openings formed in the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) and a portion of the removal areas (41; voids) of the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) are aligned with one another, forming co-aligned voids through both the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) and the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) ([0066-0075])
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 10-18, 20-24 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art does not teach or render obvious the claimed invention of the embodiment of independent claim 1 of the instant application.
Independent claim 1 is directed to a radome having a first aside and a second side, comprising a radio transmissive and visually transparent substrate which has one at least the first or second side a hard coat layer to provide a hard coated surface. A radio transmissive layer is applied to the hard coat surface and is comprise of a metal layer and/or a metal alloy layer, further including a portion with one or more voids. A primary visually-opaque layer is applied to the radio-transmissive layer, wherein the primary visually-opaque layer includes a portion with one or more voids aligned with the one or more voids in the metal layer and/or metallic allow layer, such that the radome includes one or more co-aligned voids through both the primary visually-opaque layer and the metal layer and/or metal alloy layer.
The closest prior art to the embodiment of independent claim 1 is to that of Kim et al. (KR-2017-0047070) and to Bicego (US 2020/03398053).
Kim et al. teaches a radome for a vehicle having a first side and a second side, comprising a substrate (10; radio-transmissive and visually-transparent substrate) formed of a transparent material such as injection molded polycarbonate resin; an opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) comprised of an acrylic resin, black pigment, solvent and other additives substrate (10; radio-transmissive and visually-transparent substrate) on a first side of the a substrate (10; radio-transmissive
and visually-transparent substrate); a primer layer (30; hard-coat layer) comprised of an acrylic resin covering at least a portion of the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer); and a decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) comprised of 5-30% by weight of metallic pigment including indium applied to the primer layer(30; hard-coat layer) (Figure 4; [0007-0011, 0019-0037, 0055- 0070, 0075-0079]).
Kim et al. further teaches that the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) has areas that are removed to form openings (voids), such that a portion of the radome is void of the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) ([0068-0070]). Kim et al. additionally teaches that the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) comprises a portion with one or more removal areas (41; voids), so the shape of the radome as viewed from the outside of the radome has a sense of unity with the emblem or front grill of the part where the radome is installed ([066-0068]).
As shown in Figure 4, a portion of the openings formed in the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) and a portion of the removal areas (41; voids) of the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) are aligned with one another, forming co-aligned voids through both the opaque mask layer (20; primary visually-opaque layer) and the decorative layer (40; radio-transmissive layer) ([0066-0075]).
Kim et al., however, does not teach the combination of features required by claim 1, specifically the required layer structure of radio-transmissive and visually transparent substrate surface/hard coat/radio-transmissive layer/primary visually opaque layer. There is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in Kim et al. to modify the reference to meet the limitations of instant claim 1.
Bicego et al. teaches a radar transparent decorative plate (10; radome) having a first side (203) and a second side (204) (Figure 2, 4; [0046-0047, 0065-0080]). The radar transparent decorative plate (10; radome) is comprised of a first layer (110; radio-transmissive and visually- transparent substrate) of a transparent injection molded PMMA substrate; an interface layer (131; hard coat layer) on a side of the first layer (110; radio-transmissive and visually- transparent substrate); a mentalization layer (132; radio-transmissive layer) comprising a metal and/or metal alloy applied to the interface layer (131; hard coat layer); and an opaque layer (120; primary visually-opaque layer) comprised of opaque ABS-PC or opaque ABS layer that is black colored, wherein as shown in Figure 2, a portion of the radar transparent decorative plate (10; radome) is void of the opaque layer (120; primary visually-opaque layer)([0046-0047, 0065-0080]).
Bicego et al., however, does not teach the combination of features required by claim 1, specifically the required layer structure of radio-transmissive and visually transparent substrate surface/hard coat/radio-transmissive layer/primary visually opaque layer. There is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in Bicego et al. to modify the reference to meet the limitations of instant claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA POWERS whose telephone number is (571)270-5624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 10:00AM-3:00PM.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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.
LAURA POWERS
Examiner
Art Unit 1785
/LAURA C POWERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
