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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 10-15 in the reply filed on 05/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/29/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 07/26/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner.
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 10, 12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuhashi et al. (US 2019/0002338) and further in view of Werner et al. (US 2018/0368268).
Regarding claim 10, Furuhashi discloses a vehicle window comprising a glass plate (11) which may be a laminated glass plate of two sheets of glass bonded with an intermediate resin film (0021). A glass plate of the plurality including a terminal (15) and a conductor (13) (Fig. 1, 0019). The conductor including silver and a glass frit (0043) and having a terminal joint portion to which the terminal is joined by a lead-free solder (14) (Fig 1, 0019).
Furuhashi does not teach the conductor including a polished surface in a region of the terminal joint portion including a polished portion with a porosity of 10% or less.
Werner, in the analogous field of glazing’s for vehicles (0034), teaches a glazing comprising a conductive element comprising an electrically conductive track of fritted silver paste (0007) which has been polished and has a porosity level lower than 20% (0004), overlapping the claimed porosity of 10% or less.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious for the conductor of Furuhashi to include a polished region in the terminal joint portion with a porosity of lower than 20%, as taught by Werner, to withstand stricter TCT conditions (0005).
Regarding claim 12, Furuhashi and Werner are the closest prior art or record. Furuhashi teaches a vehicle window having a conductor in the terminal joint portion and outside of the terminal joint portion (Fig. 2). Werner teaches polishing of the conductor in the terminal joint portion to withstand TCT conditions i.e., reducing propagation of cracks (0005). From the teachings of Furuhashi in view of Werner the conductor would include a polished portion in the joint portion and a non-polished portion in a region that does not include the terminal joint portion.
Werner does not expressly disclose a thickness difference, however, a thickness difference between the polished and non-polished portions would be expected given polishing will necessarily reduce the thickness in order to remove the porosity (see e.g., Fig 1 and 2 of Werner). Werner further teaches that the thickness of the connection should be controlled and uniform to reduce strain (0022). It would have been obvious to have optimized the reduction rate of film thickness between the polished portion to the non-polished portion through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 14, Furuhashi teaches the glass plate including a color ceramic layer (12; instant light-shielding layer) between the glass and terminal (Fig. 1). Containing black pigment and glass frit (0027 and 0030).
Regarding claim 15, Furuhashi teaches the conductor including an electric function portion (13a) having a feeding portion including wire filaments (13b) included in the terminal joint portion and fixed to the terminal (Fig. 1-2, 0040-0041).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 13 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Furuhashi and Werner are the closest prior art or record. Furuhashi teaches a vehicle window having a conductor in the terminal joint portion and outside of the terminal joint portion (Fig. 2). Werner teaches polishing of the conductor in the terminal joint portion to withstand TCT conditions i.e., reducing propagation of cracks (0005). From the teachings of Furuhashi in view of Werner the conductor would include a polished portion in the joint portion and a non-polished portion in a region that does not include the terminal joint portion.
The references however are silent as to a rate of arithmetic mean surface roughness and a rate of a Bi/Ag mass ratio between the polished portion and the non-polished portion as recited in claims 11 or 13. While Werner teaches polishing and an overlapping range for porosity, the polishing method (i.e., ion milling; 0007) is different from that disclosed by the present specification i.e., manual method or electric-powered method (0059). It is not clear if the same surface structures would be present thus the claimed mean surface roughness ratio would not be expected from the prior art. Likewise, any compositional difference (e.g., Bi/Ag mass ratio) between the polished vs non-polished surface portions would not be expected.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALICIA WEYDEMEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-1727. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-4.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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.
/ALICIA J WEYDEMEYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights