DETAILED ACTION
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 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara et al. (2018/0066361) in view of Shioi et al. (2010/0310778). Regarding claim 1, Nara teaches a method for manufacturing a glass plate having a first main surface and second main surface, the method comprising preparing a glass plate ([0091]), conveying a mist substance with a carrier gas to a position facing the first main surface, supplying the mist substance to the first main surface and forming a functional layer on the first main surface (figure 1, abstract, [0084]-[0085], [0087]). Nara teaches a supply nozzle (22A) having a longitudinal direction along the width of the glass plate. Nara also recognizes the possibility of unevenness in the functional layer from the supply nozzle 22A, and suggests supplying the mist substance via a plurality of communication paths (22B1, 22B2, 22B3) disposed at equal intervals in a longitudinal direction of supply nozzle 22A ([0183, [0184], fig. 21). Nara teaches this allows for individual correction of layer thickness ([0184]). In a similar field of endeavor, Shioi also teaches a method for manufacturing a glass plate having a first main surface, the method comprising preparing a glass plate, conveying a coating solution to a position facing the first main surface and forming a layer on the first main surface ([0097]-[0098]). Like Nara, Shioi is also concern with unevenness in coating thickness ([0053]) and suggests conveying the coating solution via a supply nozzle a plurality of communication paths 14 disposed at equal intervals in a longitudinal direction of the supply nozzle ([0097]-[0098], fig. 6). Like Nara, Shioi also teaches staging two rows of nozzles to provide flexibility in the intervals between nozzles ([0107]-[0108], fig. 8). Shioi teaches providing for a plurality of communication paths in a longitudinal direction of a supply nozzle provides for a coating of uniform thickness, while minimizing waste of the coating solution ([0053]). Shioi also teaches in the individual communication paths allows for control of timing of each communication path to account for glass plates having different shapes/size (see figure 6, [0111]). Accordingly, for these reasons, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have tried conveying a mist using a supply nozzle with a plurality of communication paths in the longitudinal direction of the supply nozzle, in the process of Nara, as it provides for flexibility in the arrangement of the nozzles, uniform coating thickness, and can accommodate different glass plate shapes and sizes.
Regarding claims 5-6, Nara teaches the step of forming the functional layer includes a film forming step of forming a functional film on the first main surface with the use of the mist substance as a raw material of the functional film ([0047], [0051], [0053], [0064]), via mist chemical vapor deposition ([0044]).
Regarding claim 7, Nara teaches forming a functional layer on the first main surface with use of the mist (abstract). Thus, the first main surface of the glass plate is modified by coating with the functional layer.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara et al. (2018/0066361) and Shioi et al. (2010/0310778) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Onabe et al. (JP H11323558 machine translation). Nara teaches methods for forming includes mist CVD (chemical vapor deposition) ([0077]). As can be seen in at least figures 5 and 17, Nara teaches supplying a mist substance from a supply nozzle extending from a position facing a first main surface of the glass substrate toward the first main surface. Similarly, Shioi teaches supplying a mist substance from a supply nozzle extending from a position facing a first main surface of the glass substrate toward the first main surface (see fig. 6) However, Nara and Shioi don’t specify supplying a protective gas. Onabe teaches a CVD method for providing a film on a substrate ([0001]), the method comprising supplying a mist substance from a supply nozzle (figure 2, “mist like liquid material” 4th-5th passages on page 6), and supplying a protective gas (shield gas) for protecting the mist substance along an inner wall surface of the supply nozzle (middle of page 6, figure 2). Onabe teaches the protective gas protects and cools the mist substance (abstract). Onabe also teaches such a supply nozzle predictable provides for the successful supply of a mist substance in a CVD method for forming a film on a substrate. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have utilized a similar supply nozzle with a protective gas for the CVD film forming method of Nara and Shioi, as it shield mist substances during vapor deposition, and predictable provides for successful film formation, as taught by Onabe.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara et al. (2018/0066361) and Shioi et al. (2010/0310778) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harris et al. (2002/0155299). Regarding claim 3, Nara further teaches the glass substrate can be prepared by a float glass process, which naturally comprise of forming a molten raw material in a float bath and manufacturing a glass plate by a float method. Nara also teaches for mist CVD, the glass substrate should on the order of 100°C to 200°C ([0091]), which suggests online application of the mist substance during the float process. This exemplified by Harris. Harris teaches a method for manufacturing a glass plate having a first main surface and second main surface and forming a functional layer on the first main surface using known methods including chemical vapor deposition and spray pyrolysis ([0013]). Harris also teaches supplying the mist substance toward the first main surface of the glass plate during the forming step in a float process ([0016]), wherein the float process comprises forming a molten raw material of a glass plate in a float bath ([0030]) and forming a glass plate. Harris further teaches supplying the coating material toward the first main surface of the glass plate that is being formed in the float process ([0021]). Naturally, forming a film on a glass plate during forming provides for a more efficient process. Harris also teaches the coating methods by CVD or spray pyrolysis on the glass plate during forming in the float process can take advantage of the glass plate already at a higher temperature ([0045], [0061]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have supplied the mist substance of Nara toward the first surface of the glass plate during forming by a float process, as it improves efficiency of the glass plate manufacturing process as well as take advantage energy savings of not having to reheat the glass plate for the forming the functional film.
Regarding claim 4, Nara further teaches adjusting the temperature of the mist substance in the conveying step to a temperature of 190°C ([0113], [0135], [0185], [0194]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed April 22, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under Katori have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Shioni.
Applicant argues Nara fails to teach supplying the mist substance via a plurality of communication paths disposed at equal intervals in a longitudinal direction of supply nozzle. The examiner disagrees. Nara teaches a supply nozzle 22A and communication paths (22B1, 22B2, 22B3) through which mist is supplied, wherein the communication paths are disposed at equal intervals in a longitudinal direction, the direction being the same as the longitudinal direction of the supply nozzle 22A.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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.
/QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights