CTNF 18/789,111 CTNF 71713 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status Claim(s) 1-19 is/are pending. Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 (AIA) 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over : • JP 2019-148784 (HAGIO-JP ‘784), in view of OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE LOADING IN POLY(VINYL ALCOHOL)-WATER COATINGS (OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE), and in view of PUBCHEM - SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE. HAGIO-JP ‘784 discloses optical films comprising: • a support; • an alignment film formed from an alignment film-forming composition comprising: • a polyvinyl alcohol (PVOH) polymer modified with comonomer units, PNG media_image1.png 159 538 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein in the modified PVOH polymer, the presence of alkyl groups containing 5 or more carbon atoms is not required (e.g., R can be an C1- C4 alkyl group) (corresponding to the recited “polymer having no alkyl group having 5 to 29 carbon atoms”); • optional solvent(s) (e.g., water, etc.); • one or more optional other component(s); • an optical anisotropic layer formed from an optical anisotropic layer-forming composition containing a polymerizable liquid crystal compound; wherein the optical films can be formed by a method comprising: • applying the alignment film-forming composition containing the modified PVOH polymer and optional other component(s) to a support to form an alignment layer; • subjecting the alignment layer to a rubbing treatment; • applying an optical anisotropic layer-forming composition containing a polymerizable liquid crystal compound on the rubbing-treated alignment layer. The disclosed alignment film minimizes the presence of bright spot defects in the optical anisotropic layer created by fragments or shavings of the alignment layer produced during the rubbing treatment of the alignment layer, resulting in optical anisotropic layers capable of exhibiting less than 10 (preferably less than 4) bright spot defects per 20 cm x 130 cm region. The resulting optical anisotropic layer can be incorporated, either as part of the optical film or as a separated optical anisotropic layer, in various applications (e.g., but not limited to, liquid crystal cells, organic electroluminescent (EL) display devices; etc.) (entire document, e.g., paragraph 0004-0005, 0007-0008, 0013-0015, 0019-0025, 0031-0036, 0057-0062, 0065, etc.) However, the reference does not specifically mention the recited additive. OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE discloses that it is well known in the art to incorporate surfactants (e.g., non-ionic, anionic, cationic, etc.) in water-based polymeric (e.g., containing polyvinyl alcohol (PVOH), etc.) coating compositions in order to modify various properties of the coating formulation -- for example: improve dispersibility of the polymer component; aid in the formation of homogeneous solutions; improve drying rates and/or uniformity of polymeric coatings; etc.), wherein an illustrative example of a suitable anionic surfactant used in PVOH coating compositions is sodium dodecyl sulfate (corresponding to the recited “additive having an alkyl group having 5 to 29 carbon atoms”). (page 401-402, etc.) PUBCHEM - SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE provides evidence that sodium dodecyl sulfate (corresponding to the recited “additive having an alkyl group having 5 to 29 carbon atoms”) contains a sulfate end group and a C12 alkyl group. Regarding claims 1-5, 9-13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize effective amounts of known anionic surfactants (e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate, as suggested in OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE) (corresponding to the recited “additive”) in an aqueous modified PVOH-based alignment film-forming composition of HAGIO-JP ‘784 in order to: improve dispersibility of the modified PVOH polymer in the film-forming composition; and/or aid in the formation of homogeneous film-forming compositions; and/or improve or modify the drying rates and/or uniformity of modified PVOH alignment film. Further regarding claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-11, since: (i) PUBCHEM - SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE discloses that sodium dodecyl sulfate contains a sulfate end group and contains a C12 alkyl group; and (ii) sulfate groups are well-known in the art as highly polar, highly hydrophilic groups; sodium dodecyl sulfate is an anionic surfactant (corresponding to the recited “additive”) containing the recited “hydrophilic group” and the recited “alkyl group having 12 to 22 carbon atoms”. Regarding claims 5-8, since: (i) HAGIO-JP ‘784 discloses that bright spot defects in the optical anisotropic layer generally originate from fragments or shavings of the alignment layer produced during the rubbing treatment of the alignment layer (corresponding to the recited “core of the bright point defect”)’’; (ii) OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE suggest the use of a known anionic surfactant (e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate) in PVOH-based water-based compositions; the Examiner has reason to believe that the fragments or shavings of alignment layer formed from an alignment film-forming composition containing the modified PVOH polymer of HAGIO-JP ‘784 and effective amounts of sodium dodecyl sulfate contains both the modified PVOH polymer (corresponding to the recited “polymer having no alkyl group having 5 to 29 carbon atoms”) and sodium dodecyl sulfate (corresponding to the recited “additive having an alkyl group having 5 to 29 carbon atoms”) as recited in claim 5; therefore the Examiner has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald et al. , 205 USPQ 594. Further regarding claims 5-8, since: (i) HAGIO-JP ‘784 discloses that the optical anisotropic layers of HAGIO-JP ‘784 are capable of exhibiting less than 4 bright spot defects with a diameter of 120 microns or more per 20 cm x 130 cm region (i.e., 2600 cm 2 or 0.26 m 2 ); the Examiner has reason to believe that the optical anisotropic layers of HAGIO-JP ‘784 are capable of exhibiting bright spot defect rates which at least partially read on the recited “bright point defect” rate of claim 5; therefore the Examiner has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald et al. , 205 USPQ 594. For example, a bright spot defect range of less than 4 defects/0.26 m 2 (corresponding to about less than 154 defects/10 m 2 ) includes the value of 1 defect/0.26 m 2 (corresponding to about 38 defects/10 m 2 ). Regarding claim 14-19, one of ordinary skill in the art would have utilized the optical anisotropic film of HAGIO-JP ‘784 in known optical components (e.g., polarizing plate, etc.) and image display devices (organic EL displays, liquid crystal display, etc.). Regarding PUBCHEM - SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE, in certain circumstances, references cited to show a universal fact need not be available as prior art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention. In re Wilson , 311 F.2d 266, 135 USPQ 442 (CCPA 1962). Such facts include the characteristics and properties of a material or a scientific truism. (see MPEP 2124) 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over : • JP 2019-148784 (HAGIO-JP ‘784), in view of OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE LOADING IN POLY(VINYL ALCOHOL)-WATER COATINGS (OPTIMIZATION OF SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE), and in view of PUBCHEM - SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE, as applied to claims 1-13 above, and further in view of MOTOMURA ET AL (US 2003/0152712). MOTOMURA ET AL ‘712 discloses that it is well known in the art to utilize oriented liquid crystal polymer film layers produced from polymerizable liquid crystal monomers as optical films or layers for visual display devices (e.g., liquid crystal display; organic EL display; polarizing plate; etc.). (paragraph 0002, 0006, 0019-0021, 0041-0043, 0053, 0080-0086, etc.) Regarding claims 14-19, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the optical films and optical anisotropic films of HAGIO-JP ‘784 in known optical components (e.g., polarizing plate, etc.) and image display devices (organic EL displays, liquid crystal display, etc.) as suggested by MOTOMURA ET AL ‘712 . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. MUTON (US 2006/0269768) discloses alignment surface treatments for polymer films used as supports for producing optical anisotropic layers. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Vivian Chen (Vivian.chen@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is (571) 272-1506. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:30 AM to 6 PM. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Callie Shosho, can be reached on (571) 272-1123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. The General Information telephone number for Technology Center 1700 is (571) 272-1700. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. June 13, 2026 /Vivian Chen/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787 Application/Control Number: 18/789,111 Page 2 Art Unit: 1787 Application/Control Number: 18/789,111 Page 4 Art Unit: 1787 Application/Control Number: 18/789,111 Page 5 Art Unit: 1787 Application/Control Number: 18/789,111 Page 6 Art Unit: 1787
Prosecution Insights