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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species I (Fig. 1), sub-species B (Fig. 4), claims 1-7, 9-10 in the reply filed on 06/29/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Furthermore claims 9-10 depend on withdrawn claim 8 and therefore withdrawn from consideration as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “ .. the cured product has a softening point of 250°C or higher” without defining any specific conditions, compositions or materials types to combine or prepare and therefore will be considered as an outcome/result/characteristics of a resin layer without giving any patentable weight as numerous combinations are possible which make the claim indefinite. Appropriate corrections are required to include critical underlying conditions to have this specific softening point characteristics.
Claims 2-7 are also rejected being rejected being dependent on rejected claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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 of this title, 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 obvious over Sakamoto et al (JP 2018022092 A) in view of Kojima et al. (JP 2019044136 A) and Lee et al (US 2020/0172662 A1 A1).
Regarding claim 1: Sakamoto teaches in Fig. 1-2 about a film for a wavelength conversion sheet, 10 comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
508
876
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a base material 121/124 (for clarification, page 3 teaches the material that can be used for the first base material layer 121 and the second base material layer 124 is PET which is similar to applicant’s base material layer [0039]); and
a primer layer on the base material (for clarification, page 6 teaches a primer layer may be laminated on the surface of the barrier layer 122 related to the present embodiment on the phosphor layer 11 side as needed (not shown). The primer layer is laminated between the barrier layer 122 and the phosphor layer 11, thereby improving the adhesion between the barrier layer 122 and the phosphor layer 11. The primer layer is preferably a primer layer containing a polyurethane resin, and the primer layer further preferably contains a silane coupling agent and a filler), wherein
the primer layer comprises a cured product of a resin composition comprising a polyurethane-based resin (page 6 teaches polyurethane resin and page 9 teaches in example 5 & 6, NCO / OH ratio was 1.5 which is similar to applicant’s material and resin composition ratio and reaction products like claim 3. Kojima also teaches in the abstract about forming a primer layer having reaction products like claim 3), and the cured product has a softening point of 250°C or higher.
Sakamoto in view of Kijima does not explicitly talk about the cured product of a resin has a softening point of 250°C or higher.
Lee teaches in [0064] about the cured product of a resin can have various softening points of including 250°C depending on the method of preparing such a polyester resin ([0021] – [0069].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to realize from the method of preparing the primer layer having the compositions, materials and reactions as disclosed by Sakamoto and Kojima, the cured product of a resin would have a softening point of 250°C or higher as an inherent characteristics according to the teachings of Lee and thereby to have excellent heat resistance and transparency (Lee, [0068]).
Regarding claim 2: Sakamoto teaches in page 9 wherein the resin composition has a mole ratio of isocyanate groups to hydroxyl groups (NCO/OH ratio) of 1.1 or more.
Regarding claim 3: Sakamoto teaches in page 9 and Kojima teaches in abstract wherein the polyurethane-based resin comprises a polyurethane-based resin obtained by a reaction between a polyfunctional isocyanate having a (meth)acryl group and a hydroxyl group- containing compound.
Regarding claim 4: Sakamoto teaches in page 6 wherein the resin composition comprises a silane coupling agent.
Regarding claim 5: Sakamoto teaches in Fig. 1 further comprising a barrier layer 122 between the base material and the primer layer.
Regarding claim 6: Sakamoto teaches in Fig. 1 wherein the barrier layer comprises an inorganic oxide layer 122b and an organic coating layer 122a, and the organic coating layer is in contact with the primer layer.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Sakamoto et al (JP 2018022092 A) in view of Kojima et al. (JP 2019044136 A) and Lee et al (US 2020/0172662 A1 A1) and further in view of Kuraray et al. (WO 2011/122036 A1)
Regarding claim 7: Sakamoto does not teach wherein the barrier layer is a layer comprising a reaction product of a composition comprising a metal oxide and a phosphorus compound.
Kuraray teaches in the abstract wherein a composite structure comprising a reaction product of a composition comprising a metal oxide and a phosphorus compound.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have the feature as claimed by forming the barrier layer in Sakamoto’s device according to the teaching’s of Kuraray and thereby having maximum infrared ray absorption (Kuraray, abstract)
use boron nitride instead of silicon nitride in the cavity (28, Figure 3) of Orlowski according to the teaching of Lee ([0017], [0022] and [0028]), since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material such as silicon nitride or boron nitride on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED SHAMSUZZAMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1839. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 am -4 pm EST.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/Mohammed Shamsuzzaman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights