DETAILED ACTION
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7, 8, and 12 are rejected 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.
Claim 7 recites “selected from the group formed by…”. It is not clear if this is an open or closed group. For clarity, Examiner suggests amending the limitation to read “selected from the group consisting of…”. Clarification is requested.
Claim 8 recites “several glass substrates”. It is not clear what would be considered “several”. Examiner assumes greater than one glass substrate but clarification is requested.
Claim 12 recites the limitations “other glazing unit for a motor vehicle”, “other glazed unit for a motor vehicle”, “other glazed unit for a building”, and “other glazed unit for electrical domestic appliances”. It is not clear what would be considered “other glazed units” as it relates to each of the applications. Examiner assumes that any glazed unit would meet the limitations as claimed. Clarification is requested.
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, 4-8, 12, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henze et al. (US 20120295081) in view of Dobrowolski (Handbook of Optics).
Henze discloses a composite material for glazings and methods for producing the same. Concerning claims 1 and 5-8, Henze discloses a method comprising depositing a sol-gel that is silane-based, resulting in a silicon oxide after curing, and forming patterns by an etched roller or the etched roller having a sol-gel layer disposed and subsequently deposited onto a glass substrate, wherein the pattern can be any pattern with the pattern depth going from 100 nm to 1 mm, and subsequently heat treated under the claimed time and temperature to form a mineral coating (para. 0012-0036 and Examples). However, Henze is silent to the thickness of the resulting patterned coating having locally controlled variable heights. With respect to claims 4 and 16, the thickness of the resulting coating is from 0.01 to 1 mm (para. 0033). Regarding claim 12, the coated glass substrate is used in methods for applying the glass substrate in the claimed applications (para. 0001). However, Henze is silent to the thickness of the resulting patterned coating having locally controlled variable heights. With respect to claim 4, the thickness of the resulting coating is from 0.01 to 1 mm (para. 0033).
Dobrowolski discloses that an optical film designer may be required to provide a coating with a color, wherein some of the parameters for producing such a coating include layer thickness, number of layers, refractive indices, and extinction coefficients (section 42.3, p. 42.9). Since Henze discloses the pattern can be any pattern with a pattern depth from 100 nm to 1mm, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the claimed different thicknesses for each patterned portion, in order to provide different colors.
Claims 2-3, 10, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henze et al. (US 20120295081) in view of Dobrowolski (Handbook of Optics) as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of Carter et al. (US 5030503).
The prior art discloses the above but is silent to the claimed laminate.
Carter discloses a reflective patterned glass product. Concerning claims 2-3 and 10, Carter discloses a similar structure wherein the coating can be applied to an outer surface of the glass substrate in order to provide a more pronounced patterned appearance, wherein the glass substrate is part of laminated glazing structure for use in architectural products (cols. 2-5). With respect to claims 14 and 15, it would be obvious to have the surfaces as claimed, in order to provide a more pronounced patterned appearance. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the claimed structure for a more pronounced patterned appearance for use in architectural products.
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henze et al. (US 20120295081) in view of Dobrowolski (Handbook of Optics) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Blazy (US 20130280487).
The prior art discloses the above including at least a partially transparent substrate but is silent to a colored glass substrate and a textured substrate.
Blazy discloses a textured decorative glass, wherein the glass can be colored and the texturing allows for a decorative aesthetic (para. 0008-0010 and 0045-0046; Abstract). As such, for aesthetic and decorative purposes, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a colored and textured glass.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henze et al. (US 20120295081) in view of Dobrowolski (Handbook of Optics) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Guardian Technical Guidelines.
The prior art discloses the above but is silent to the claimed heat strengthening treatment.
The Guardian Technical Guidelines discloses that heat strengthening glass provides a glass substrate with additional strength to handle different environmental conditions such as increased wind load and thermal stress (p. 4). As such, in order to withstand increased wind load and thermal stress, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a heat strengthened glass sheet.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRASHANT J KHATRI whose telephone number is (571)270-3470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6:30PM.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
PRASHANT J. KHATRI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/PRASHANT J KHATRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783