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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed on 8/26/2024 has been entered. The Applicant amended claims 3-7, 10-15, 19, 22-28, 68-70 and canceled 30-49, 51-67. Claims 1-29, 50, 68-70 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), based on an application filed in People's Republic of CHINA on 2/28/2022. The Applicant has filed a certified copy of the CN202210191806.8 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55, which has been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/2024 and 9/20/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings received on 8/26/2024 are accepted to by the Examiner.
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 2, 22 and 50 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 2 and 50 recite: “a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm”, which makes the claim indefinite. The term "a surface feature size" referred to which measurement is not clear from the claim language.
In paragraph [0112] of the specification, the "surface feature size" is explicitly defined as: "’Surface feature size,’ as described herein, is measured using optical microscopy at 200× magnification. Images are obtained of two different 500 μm×1000 μm scanned areas. In each image, the maximum distance across the cross section of the base of the 10 largest surface features is measured. ‘Surface feature size’ refers to the average maximum distance across the cross section of the base of the 20 surface features from the two scanned areas. For example, for surface features with a triangular base, the maximum distance across the cross section of the base is the height of the triangular base. For surface features with a rectangular base, the maximum distance across the cross section of the base is the diagonal measurement across the base". The claim merely recites "surface feature size". The definition of "surface feature size" in this case is entirely dependent on a specific, non-standard measurement methodology. A claim must particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter of the invention. Because this testing protocol is located only in the specification and is not explicitly recited in the claims, it is functionally a hidden limitation. Under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), a claim must inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with "reasonable certainty”. In this case, because the claim merely recites "surface feature size" without explicitly putting the method of measurement or the specific calculation rules into the claim itself, the claim is indefinite.
To overcome the rejection, it is recommended to amend the claims by explicitly incorporating the exact "surface feature size" definition from paragraph [0112] into the claims (e.g., "wherein the surface feature size is defined as the average maximum distance across the cross-section... measured using optical microscopy at 200× magnification..."). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 recites “... the article comprises a peak single side light reflectance from 520 nm to 560 nm...", which makes the claim indefinite. Reflectance is measured as a percentage (%), proportion, or ratio, whereas nanometers (nm) measure wavelengths. As the claim written, it reads as if the reflectance amount is measured in nanometer. Examiner recommended phrasing would be: "...comprises a peak single side light reflectance at a wavelength from 520 nm to 560 nm..." or "...comprises a peak single side light reflectance wavelength from 520 nm to 560 nm...". This specific range (520–560 nm) falls squarely within the green light portion of the visible spectrum. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-29 and 68-70 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Bazemore et al. (US 20190107751) in view of Hart et al. (US 2018/0321425).
Regarding claim 1, Bazemore teaches a coated textured glass article (refer to US 2019/0107751) comprising: a glass body (substrate 100, [0025]; glass substrates, [0004], substrates include glasses [0011]) comprising a first surface (surfaces 112, [0025], Fig. 2A); a plurality of polyhedral surface features (crystals 220 on glass surface 112, [0068], polyhedral surface having many faces having straight edges, and sharp corners, Fig. 2A) extending from the first surface (extending from surface 112), each of the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprising a base (base of 220 is 112 below 220, Fig. 2A) on the first surface (on 112) and a plurality of facets (plurality of facets, sides of crystals 220) extending from the base (facets extending from 112) and converging toward one another (see Fig. 2A, facets converging toward one another); and a coating disposed on the first surface of the body and the plurality of polyhedral surface features (applying a coating on the textured surface, may be anti-reflective coating, scratch-resistant coating, [0075]),
Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach the coating comprising a multilayer interference stack.
Bazemore and Hart are related as multilayer coating devices.
Hart teaches the coating (optical coating 120, [0258]; Figs. 2-7) comprising a multilayer interference stack (multi-layer interference stack 130, [0274]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of Bazemore with a multilayer interference stack as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stack which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006]
Regarding claim 3, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprises a surface feature height greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 40 μm (Bazemore disclosed few examples of the features of the resulting textured surface: The average cross-sectional dimension of the features of the resulting textured surface was about 23 micrometers, [0082]; the average cross-sectional dimension of the features of the resulting textured surface was about 33 micrometers [0084]; about 20 micrometers, [0086]). Bazemore disclosed average about 23, about 33 and about 20 micrometers, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a surface feature height greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 40 μm to exhibit desired anti-glare properties and to control exhibiting of sparkle,
Regarding claim 4, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprises triangular pyramids, quadrangular pyramids, or a combination thereof (Fig. 2A-B show comprises triangular pyramids, quadrangular pyramids, or a combination thereof. FIG. 2A, shows the application of the etchant forms crystals 220 on glass surface 112, [0068]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprises a surface roughness greater than or equal to 2 μm and less than or equal to 7 μm (anti-glare surface exhibits an RMS roughness about 500 nanometers or greater, [0034]).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises a plurality of layers (Figs. 2/3 show plurality of layers), wherein the plurality of layers comprises at least one low refractive index layer and at least one high refractive index layer. (Fraction of softer (typically lower refractive index) material in the coating stack [0250]. [0264]. In FIGs. 2 and 3, the multi-layer interference stack 130, the following sequence of layers: L/H/L/H or H/L/H/L such that the first low RI layer and the second high RI layer appear to alternate along the physical thickness of the multi-layer interference stack 130, [0263]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified article of Bazemore the plurality of layers comprises at least one low refractive index layer and at least one high refractive index layer, as taught by Hart or the predicable advantage of preventing from scratch and other types of damage, as Hart disclosed (Low-index materials are typically lower-hardness materials, but some amount of low-index material is typically desired to efficiently tailor reflection and color targets. The thickness and the fraction of low-index material / lower-hardness material is denoted in the design descriptions in terms of absolute thickness and fraction of total coating thickness. It can be useful to quantify both the total amount of low-index material in the entire coating, as well as the amount of low-index material that is above the thickest high-hardness layer in the coating design. The thickest high-hardness layer in the coating design protects the layers underneath it from scratch and damage, meaning that the low-index layers above the thickest high-hardness layer are most susceptible to scratch and other types of damage, [0234]).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 7 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises at least one period, each period comprising one of the at least one low refractive index layers and one of the at least one high refractive index layers (wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises a plurality of periods such that the first low RI layer and the second high RI layer alternate.[0021]; third layer(s) 130C may be provided as a separate layer from a period 132 and may be disposed between the period or plurality of periods and the capping layer 131, as shown in FIG. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified article of Bazemore wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises at least one period, each period comprising one of the at least one low refractive index layers and one of the at least one high refractive index layers, as taught by Hart in for the predictable advantage of alternating low RI layer and the high RI layer or vice versa, [0021-0022].
Regarding claim 9, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 8 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises from 1 to 20 periods (The multi-layer interference stack can include up to about 6 periods, up to about 10 periods, up to about 14 periods, or up to about 20 periods, [0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified article of Bazemore wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises from 1 to 20 periods, as taught by Hart in for the predictable advantage of alternating low RI layer and the high RI layer or vice versa, [0021-0022].
Regarding claim 10, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 7 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the at least one low refractive index layer comprises SiO2, Al2O3, GeO2, SiO, A1OxNy, SiOxNu1, SiAlxOy, SiuAlVOXNy, MgO, MgAl2O4, MgF2, BaF2, CaF2, DyF3, YbF3, CeF3, or a combination thereof, wherein subscripts "u," "x," and "y" are from 0 to 1, (Example A included a 12-layer optical coating 300, including layers 305, 310, 320, 330, 340, 345, 350, 360, 370, 380, 390 and 500 sequentially disposed on top of one another, [0352]; TABLE A Structure of Example A; The article fabricated according to Example A exhibited significantly improved abrasion resistance, … Fabrication methods similar to those used for Example A may be used to fabricate the structures of Examples 1 through 16, and similar structures. [0355]. Table A shows SiO.sub.2 (305), [0355]; Silicon dioxide is classified as a low refractive index material.
Regarding claim 11, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 7 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the at least one high refractive index layer comprises SiuAlvOxNy, Ya₂O₅, Nb₂O₅, AIN, Si₃N₄, AlOxNy, SiOxNy, HfO₂, TiO2, ZrO₂, Y₂O₃, Al2O₃, MoO₃, diamond-like carbon, or a combination thereof, wherein subscripts "u," "x," and "y" are from 0 to 1, (In the Examples, it should be noted that AlO.sub.xN.sub.y, Si.sub.uO.sub.xN.sub.y, and Si.sub.uAl.sub.vO.sub.xN.sub.y were found to be substantially interchangeable as the high-index material in the modeled examples, with minor process adjustments to re-create the targeted refractive index dispersion values and layer thickness designs provided, which are apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. [0351]; Example A included a 12-layer optical coating 300, including layers 305, 310, 320, 330, 340, 345, 350, 360, 370, 380, 390 and 500 sequentially disposed on top of one another, [0352]; TABLE A Structure of Example A; The article fabricated according to Example A exhibited significantly improved abrasion resistance, … Fabrication methods similar to those used for Example A may be used to fabricate the structures of Examples 1 through 16, and similar structures. [0355]. Table A shows SiuAlvOxNy (layer 330), high-index material (Table A, page 24).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 7 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the at least one low refractive index layer comprises a thickness greater than or equal to 2 nm and less than or equal to 200 nm. (TABLE A, shows SiO.sub.2 (305), thickness is 87.84 nm.).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 7 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the at least one high refractive index layer comprises a thickness greater than or equal to 5 nm and less than or equal to 5000 nm. (Table A, page 24, shows SiuAlvOxNy (layer 330), high-index material (Table A). a thickness greater than or equal to 5 nm and less than or equal to 5000 nm, Target thickness 49.63 nm.).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, and wherein the article comprises a hardness greater than or equal to 10 GPa, as measured at the outer surface by a Berkovich Indenter Hardness Test along an indentation depth of 100 nm to 500 nm. (The article exhibits a maximum hardness of about 12 GPa or greater as measured on the outer surface by a Berkovich Indenter Hardness Test along an indentation depth of about 50 nm or greater, e.g., about 100 nm to about 500 nm. [0009]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the article comprises a hardness greater than or equal to 10 GPa, as measured at the outer surface by a Berkovich Indenter Hardness Test along an indentation depth of 100 nm to 500 nm, as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stacks which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 15, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises an outer surface (Fig. 1, surface 122) opposite the first surface of the body (First surface 112, [Fig. 1]), and wherein the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 6°, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, (The article exhibits a single side average photopic light reflectance measured at the outer surface as measured at near normal incidence of about 10% or less over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single sided reflectance may be 9% or less, 8% or less, 7% or less, 6% or less, 5% or less, 4% or less, 3% or less, or 2% or less, [0009]. Unless otherwise specified, the average reflectance or transmittance is measured at an incident illumination angle from about 0 degrees to about 10 degrees, [0274]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stacks which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 16, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 15 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the single side average photopic light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 7%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm (The article exhibits a single side average photopic light reflectance measured at the outer surface as measured at near normal incidence of about 10% or less over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single sided reflectance may be 9% or less, 8% or less, 7% or less, 6% or less, 5% or less, 4% or less, 3% or less, or 2% or less, [0009]; Unless otherwise specified, the average reflectance or transmittance is measured at an incident illumination angle from about 0 degrees to about 10 degrees, [0274]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the single side average photopic light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 7%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm., as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stacks which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 17, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 16 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the single side average photopic light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 10%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, (a single side photopic average light reflectance of about 12% or about 14% or more, and (2) a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the single side average photopic light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 10%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stacks which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 18, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 17 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the single side average photopic light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 20%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm (a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. .. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be as high as 99.9%), [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the single side average photopic light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 20%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm., as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stacks which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 19, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body (first surface 112; Figs, 1-4), and wherein the article comprises a peak single side light reflectance greater than or equal to 25%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60 referenced to normal incidence,[i.e. an angle very close to 00 from the "normal"], over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm., (a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be about 12% or more, 14% or more, 20% or more, 30% or more, 40% or more, 50% or more, 60% or more, 70% or more, 80% or more, or 90% or more. [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the multilayer interference stack comprises an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, and wherein the article comprises a peak single side light reflectance greater than or equal to 25%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stacks which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 20, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 19 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the peak single side light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 40%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 6°, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm. (The article exhibits at least one of: (1) a single side photopic average light reflectance of about 12% or about 14% or more, and (2) a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. … The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be as high as 99.9%., [0010]; near normal incident angle is. an angle very close to 00 from the "normal"]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coating of the surface textured glass surface of modified Bazemore wherein the peak single side light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 40%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm. as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of to have a multi-layer interference stack which are abrasion resistant, scratch resistant and have improved optical performance [0006].
Regarding claim 21, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 20 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the peak single side light reflectance of the article is greater than or equal to 50%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm. (The article exhibits at least one of: (1) a single side photopic average light reflectance of about 12% or about 14% or more, and (2) a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. .. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be as high as 99.9%, [0010]; near normal incident angle is an angle very close to 0, 100 or less from the "normal", [299]).
Regarding claim 22, as best understood (see 112(b) rejection), the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches wherein, the article comprises a peak single side light reflectance from 520 nm to 560 nm, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm. (This specific range, 520–560 nm, falls squarely within the green light portion of the visible spectrum; Hart teaches; a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. [0010]; article reflectance color coordinates in the (L*, a*, b*) colorimetry system for all incidence angles from 0 degrees to 90 degrees under an International Commission on Illumination illuminant exhibiting a reference point color shift of less than about 12 from a reference point as measured at the outer surface, the reference point comprising at least one of the color coordinates (a*=0, b*=0), and the reflectance color coordinates of the substrate, [0012]; a ‘green’ coating may have a* less than 5 or less than 1 for all viewing angles from 0 to 90 degrees. [0240]; therefore, Hart teaches a peak single side light reflectance from green light, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm.
Regarding claim 23, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches, the article comprises an article reflectance color coordinate L* greater than or equal to 20 and less than or equal to 90, as measured under D65 illumination and a 100 standard observer angle, (the L* coordinate of the articles described herein are the same as the reference point and do not influence color shift. [0309]; reflected angular color shift referenced to normal incidence may be about 20 or more, about 22 or more, or about 24 or more. The reflected angular color shift referenced to normal incidence may be 100 or less., [0017]).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the article comprises at least one of article reflectance color coordinates a* and b* greater than or equal to -30 and less than or equal to 30, as measured under D65 illumination and a 10° standard observer angle, (under D65 illuminant, in the CIE L* a* b* color space: a photopic reflectance of 0.48%; an a* value of −6.9, a b* value of −0.2; and thus provided a low-reflectance, low- to medium-color ‘green’ scratch-resistant coating on a glass substrate, [393]). a ‘green’ coating may have a* less than 5 or less than 1 for all viewing angles from 0 to 90 degrees, [0240]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified coating of the surface textured glass surface of Bazemore wherein the article comprises at least one of article reflectance color coordinates a* and b* greater than or equal to -30 and less than or equal to 30, as measured under D65 illumination and a 10° standard observer angle,
as taught by Hart, for the predictable advantage of providing a low-reflectance, low- to medium-color ‘green’ scratch-resistant coating on a glass substrate, as Hart teaches in [0393].
Regarding claim 25, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches, the article exhibits an angular color shift greater than or equal to 5, as measured at an incident illumination angle greater than or equal to 20 degrees (exhibit a reflected angular color shift of about 12 or more for at least one incident illumination angle that is 20 degrees, [0017]), referenced to normal incidence (referenced to normal incidence, [0017]), under D65 illumination (under an International Commission on Illumination illuminant selected from the group consisting of D series illuminants, [0017]; the angular color shift, the reference point color shift and the color coordinates (a* and/or b*) described herein are observed under a D65, [0040]); and the angular color shift is calculated using the equation √ ((a*2-a*1)2 +(b*2-b*1)2), with a*1, and b*1 representing the coordinates of the article when viewed at normal incidence and a*2, and b*2 representing the coordinates of the article when viewed at the incident illumination angle (angular color shift is calculated using the equation √(a*2−a*1)2+(b*2−b*1)2), with a*1, and b*1 representing the coordinates of the article when viewed at normal incidence and a*2, and b*2 representing the coordinates of the article when viewed at the incident illumination angle. [0017]).
Regarding claim 26, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), Hart teaches, wherein the article exhibits a reference point color shift greater than or equal to 2, as measured at a normal incidence under D65 illumination; and the reference point color shift is calculated using the equation √(a*² + b*²), (color shift is defined by √((a*.sub.article).sup.2+(b*.sub.article).sup.2). When the reference point is the color coordinates of the substrate, The color shift from a reference point may be less than about 10, less than about 8, less than about 6, less than about 4, less than about 2, [0012]; the angular color shift, the reference point color shift and the color coordinates (a* and/or b*) described herein are observed under a D65, [0040]).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the glass body comprises aluminosilicate glass (substrate may include alkali aluminosilicate glass, [0036, 0045]).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the glass body comprises a glass-ceramic body (substrate may include crystalline substrates such as glass ceramic substrates, [0036])
Regarding claim 29, Bazemore teaches a coated textured glass article (refer to US 20190107751) comprising: a glass body comprising a first surface (substrate 100, [0025]; glass substrates, [0004], substrates include glasses [0011], first surfaces 112, [0025], substrate may be amorphous and may include glass, [0036], Fig. 2A);
a plurality of polyhedral surface features (Fig. 2A, a plurality of 220, crystals 220 on glass surface 112, polyhedral surface, having many faces having straight edges, and sharp corners) extending from the first surface (extending from surface 112, see Fig. 2A); and a coating disposed on the first surface of the body and the plurality of polyhedral surface features (applying a coating on the textured surface, may be anti-reflective coating, scratch-resistant coating, [0075], Fig. 2A, forms plurality of crystals 220 on glass surface 112, [0068]; Fig. 2A), the coating comprising an anti-reflective coating, scratch-resistant coating, (applying a coating on the textured surface, may be anti-reflective coating, scratch-resistant coating, [0075]),
Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach the coating comprising a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm.
Bazemore and Hart are related as multilayer coating device.
Hart teaches the coating (optical coating 120, [0258]; Figs. 2-7) comprising a multilayer interference stack (multi-layer interference stack 130, [0274]), the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body (outer surface 122, [0258], opposite to surface of 110, [0258], Fig. 2), wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 6°, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm (optical coating 120; [0260]; Figs. 2-7; comprises a multilayer interference stack 130, [0274], the multilayer interference stack having an outer surface 122, opposite the first surface, first surface of 110, see Figs. 2-7; “The article exhibits a single side average photopic light reflectance measured at the outer surface as measured at near normal incidence of about 10% or less over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single sided reflectance may be 9% or less, 8% or less, 7% or less, 6% or less, 5% or less, 4% or less, 3% or less, or 2% or less. The single sided reflectance may be as low as 0.1%. … incidence angle from 0 degrees to 90 degrees”, [0009]; in another embodiment “The optical coating comprises a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack having an outer surface opposite the major surface… The article exhibits at least one of: (1) a single side photopic average light reflectance of about 12% or about 14% or more, and (2) a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be about 12% or more, 14% or more, 20% or more, 30% or more, 40% or more, 50% or more, 60% or more, 70% or more, 80% or more, or 90% or more. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be as high as 99.9%”, [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coated textured glass article of Bazemore wherein: the coating comprising a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, as taught by Hart for the predictable advantage of improving optical performance as taught by Hart in [0006].
Regarding claim 68, the modified Bazemore teaches the textured glass article according to claim 29 (see above), Hart teaches a consumer electronic device (FIGS. 87A and 87B show a consumer electronic device 8700, [0350]), comprising: a housing having a front surface, a back surface, and side surfaces (a housing 8702 having front 8704, back 8706, and side surfaces 8708; [0350]); and electrical components provided at least partially within the housing (electrical components that are at least partially inside or entirely within the housing, [0350]), the electrical components including at least a controller, a memory, and a display, the display being provided at or adjacent the front surface of the housing; wherein the back surface of the housing includes the coated textured glass article of claim 29. (the housing and including at least a controller, a memory, and a display 8710 at or adjacent to the front surface of the housing; and a cover substrate 8712 at or over the front surface of the housing such that it is over the display. In some embodiments, the cover substrate 8712 may include any of the glass articles disclosed herein. [0350], the coated textured glass article in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 69, the modified Bazemore teaches the textured glass article according to claim 29 (see above), Hart teaches a consumer electronic device (FIGS. 87A and 87B show a consumer electronic device 8700, [0350]), comprising: a housing having a front surface, a back surface, and side surfaces (a housing 8702 having front 8704, back 8706, and side surfaces 8708; [0350]); and electrical components provided at least partially within the housing (electrical components that are at least partially inside or entirely within the housing, [0350]), the electrical components including at least a controller, a memory, and a display, the display being provided at or adjacent the front surface of the housing; wherein the back surface of the housing includes the coated textured glass article of claim 29. (the housing and including at least a controller, a memory, and a display 8710 at or adjacent to the front surface of the housing; and a cover substrate 8712 at or over the front surface of the housing such that it is over the display. In some embodiments, the cover substrate 8712 may include any of the glass articles disclosed herein. [0350], the coated textured glass article in claim 29 above).
Regarding claim 70, the modified Bazemore teaches the textured glass article according to claim 50 (see above), Hart teaches a consumer electronic device (FIGS. 87A and 87B show a consumer electronic device 8700, [0350]), comprising: a housing having a front surface, a back surface, and side surfaces; and electrical components provided at least partially within the housing, the electrical components including at least a controller, a memory, and a display, the display being provided at or adjacent the front surface of the housing; wherein the back surface of the housing includes the coated textured glass article of claim 50. (FIGS. 87A and 87B show a consumer electronic device 8700 including a housing 8702 having front 8704, back 8706, and side surfaces 8708; electrical components (not shown) that are at least partially inside or entirely within the housing and including at least a controller, a memory, and a display 8710 at or adjacent to the front surface of the housing; and a cover substrate 8712 at or over the front surface of the housing such that it is over the display. In some embodiments, the cover substrate 8712 may include any of the glass articles disclosed herein. In some embodiments, at least one of a portion of the housing or the cover substrate comprises the glass articles disclosed herein. [0350] and [claim 30]). the coated textured glass article in claim 50 above).
Claims 2, 5 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Bazemore et al. (US 20190107751) in view of Hart et al. (US 2018/0321425).
And further in view of Hancock JR. et al. (US 2022/0073412, of record).
Regarding claim 2, As best understood (pl. see 112(b) rejection above), the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above). Although, Bazemore in [0063-0070] disclosed different methods for changing the surface features/crystals size: by density and numbers, including disposing or maintaining the etchant on the surface until a sufficient number and size of precipitates are formed and the desired etched surface is formed [0063]; FIGS. 2A and 2B, the number of the crystals on substrate surface can influence the maximum size of the crystals and the size of the surface features; [0068]; Bazemore also disclosed few examples of the features of the resulting textured surface, about 23 micrometers, about 33 micrometers, about 20 micrometers in [0082], [0084] and [0086], Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprises a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm.
Bazemore and Hancock are related as Textured Glass with Polyhedral Surface Features.
Hancock teaches “a surface feature size at the base greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 100 μm, [claim 1], “a surface feature size at the base of 10-100 μm, [abstract]. The claimed range (50–300 μm) overlaps with the prior art range (10–100 μm) between 50 μm and 100 μm. Hancock also teaches “a textured glass article may comprise: a body comprising an aluminosilicate glass … a base on the first surface, and a surface feature size at the base greater than 100 μm and less than or equal to 350 μm” [0017]. Therefore, knowing different methods that Bazemore disclosed for changing the surface features/crystals size and Hancock’s discloser of having feature size at the base greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 100 μm in one embodiment and greater than 100 μm and less than or equal to 350 μm in another embodiment, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to select a size within greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm for a preferred transmittance haze. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coated textured glass article of modified Bazemore to select a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm, which is within the range disclosed by Hancock for the advantage of having desired transmittance of the article.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Bazemore teaches the article according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprises a facet angle, [Fig. 2A]. Bazemore teaches crystals 220 on glass surface 112, which grow (11A) but remain relatively small in size, and provide smaller spaces between the crystals 230 and also the lower water solubility of the crystals 220 enables the rapid formation of crystal seeds at a higher density. The crystal seeds grow larger due to the higher density of the crystal seeds. When the etchant of one or more embodiments is removed and a portion of the surface 112 of the glass is removed (12A), the resulting anti-glare surface has features 240 having a smaller size, [0068].
Bazemore fails to explicitly disclose greater than or equal to 100 and less than or equal to 250.
Bazemore and Hancock are related as Textured Glass with Polyhedral Surface Features.
Hancock teaches facet angle greater than or equal to 0.5° and less than or equal to 12°, [0085]; The claimed range (greater than or equal to 100 and less than or equal to 250) overlaps with the prior art range (greater than or equal to 0.5° and less than or equal to 12°) between 100 μm and 120 μm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified article of Bazemore wherein the surface features comprise a facet angle greater than or equal to 100 and less than or equal to 120 to for the predictable advantage of having desired anti-glare surface sparkle as taught by Hancock in [0068].
Regarding claim 50, as best understood (see 112(b) rejection), Bazemore teaches a coated textured glass article (refer to US 20190107751; a coating on the textured surface, [0075]) comprising: a glass body comprising a first surface (substrate 100, [0025]; glass substrates, [0004], substrates include glasses [0011], first surfaces 112, [0025], Fig. 2A); a plurality of polyhedral surface features (Fig. 2A, a plurality of 220, crystals 220 on glass surface 112, polyhedral surface, having many faces having straight edges, and sharp corners) extending from the first surface (extending from surface 112, see Fig. 2A); each of the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprising a base on the first surface (Fig. 2A shows each of the plurality of polyhedral surface features 220 comprising a base on the first surface 112) and a plurality of facets extending from the base and converging toward one another (Fig. 2A shows sides of 220 extending from the base 112 and converging toward one another),
a coating disposed on the first surface of the body and the plurality of polyhedral surface features (applying a coating on the textured surface, may be anti-reflective coating, scratch-resistant coating, [0075]),
Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprising a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm and a surface feature height greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 40 μm; and the coating comprising a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm.
With respect to the limitation “a surface feature height greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 40 μm”, Bazemore disclosed few examples of the features of the resulting textured surface: The average cross-sectional dimension of the features of the resulting textured surface was about 23 micrometers, [0082]; the average cross-sectional dimension of the features of the resulting textured surface was about 33 micrometers [0084]; about 20 micrometers, [0086]). Bazemore disclosed average about 23, about 33 and about 20 micrometers, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a surface feature height greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 40 μm to exhibit desired anti-glare properties and to control exhibiting of sparkle,
Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprising a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm. Bazemore in [0063-0070] disclosed different methods for changing the surface features/crystals size: by density and numbers, including disposing or maintaining the etchant on the surface until a sufficient number and size of precipitates are formed and the desired etched surface is formed [0063]; FIGS. 2A and 2B, the number of the crystals on substrate surface can influence the maximum size of the crystals and the size of the surface features; [0068]; Bazemore also disclosed few examples of the features of the resulting textured surface, about 23 micrometers, about 33 micrometers, about 20 micrometers in [0082], [0084] and [0086], Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the plurality of polyhedral surface features comprises a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm.
Bazemore and Hancock are related as Textured Glass with Polyhedral Surface Features.
Hancock teaches a surface feature size at the base greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 100 μm, ( a surface feature size at the base of 10-100 μm, [abstract]. The claimed range (50–300 μm) overlaps with the prior art range (10–100 μm) between 50 μm and 100 μm. Hancock also teaches “a textured glass article may comprise: a body comprising an aluminosilicate glass … a base on the first surface, and a surface feature size at the base greater than 100 μm and less than or equal to 350 μm” [0017]. Therefore, knowing different methods that Bazemore disclosed for changing the surface features/crystals size and Hancock’s discloser of having feature size at the base greater than or equal to 10 μm and less than or equal to 100 μm in one embodiment and greater than 100 μm and less than or equal to 350 μm in another embodiment, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to select a size within greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm for a preferred transmittance haze. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coated textured glass article of modified Bazemore to select a surface feature size greater than or equal to 50 μm and less than or equal to 300 μm, which is within the range disclosed by Hancock for the advantage of having desired transmittance of the article.
Modified Bazemore doesn’t explicitly teach the coating comprising a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm.
Bazemore and Hart are related as multilayer coating device.
Hart teaches the coating (optical coating 120, [0258]; Figs. 2-7) comprising a multilayer interference stack (multi-layer interference stack 130, [0274]), the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body (outer surface 122, [0258], opposite to surface of 110, [0258], Fig. 2), wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 6°, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm (optical coating 120; [0260]; Figs. 2-7; comprises a multilayer interference stack 130, [0274], the multilayer interference stack having an outer surface 122, opposite the first surface, first surface of 110, see Figs. 2-7; “The article exhibits a single side average photopic light reflectance measured at the outer surface as measured at near normal incidence of about 10% or less over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single sided reflectance may be 9% or less, 8% or less, 7% or less, 6% or less, 5% or less, 4% or less, 3% or less, or 2% or less. The single sided reflectance may be as low as 0.1%. … incidence angle from 0 degrees to 90 degrees”, [0009]; in another embodiment “The optical coating comprises a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack having an outer surface opposite the major surface… The article exhibits at least one of: (1) a single side photopic average light reflectance of about 12% or about 14% or more, and (2) a single side maximum reflectance of about 12% or more, or about 14% or more, measured at the outer surface for at least one near normal incident angle over an optical wavelength regime in the range from about 400 nm to about 700 nm. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be about 12% or more, 14% or more, 20% or more, 30% or more, 40% or more, 50% or more, 60% or more, 70% or more, 80% or more, or 90% or more. The single side photopic average light reflectance and/or the single side maximum reflectance may be as high as 99.9%”, [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the coated textured glass article of Bazemore wherein: the coating comprising a multilayer interference stack, the multilayer interference stack comprising an outer surface opposite the first surface of the body, wherein: the article comprises a single side average photopic light reflectance greater than or equal to 4%, as measured at the outer surface at an incident illumination angle of 60, referenced to normal incidence, over a wavelength range from 400 nm to 700 nm, as taught by Hart for the predictable advantage of improving optical performance as taught by Hart in [0006].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1. Bookbinde et al. (US 10961147): Glass Articles with integral anti-reflection component on a surface of the articles. (Exhibits a specular reflectance that is less than or equal to about 85 percent of a specular reflectance of the glass substrate alone when measured at wavelengths of about 450 nanometers to about 750 nanometers. The article also exhibit a specular reflectance of less than 4 percent across the same spectrum.)
2. O’Neill (20210313482), Light redirecting film having stray-light mitigation properties useful with solar modules.
3. Wang et al. (CN 113966114). Shell Body, Preparation Method Thereof And Electronic Device; main body comprises a plurality of convex structures, (of record).
4. Haghdoost et al. (US 20170190139), Coatings and coated surfaces with selected surface characteristics and features
To overcome the rejections as written, the Applicant is recommended to amend the claims by explicitly incorporating the exact "surface feature size" definition from paragraph [0112] of the specification into the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAHMAN ABDUR whose telephone number is (571)270-0438. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 5:30 pm PST.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/R.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights