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 I in the reply filed on 07/31/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 9 and 11-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/31/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (JP 2019-094468) in view of Tanaka et al. (US 2011/0000658).
Regarding claims 1 and 5-7, Kawai discloses a spectacle lens (0087) comprising a substrate (0087-0088) and antifog layer (0014) wherein the antifog layer contains a resin (0013) has a thickness of 1 to 50 microns (0089).
Kawai does not disclose an antibacterial agent.
Tanaka discloses lenses for spectacles (0002) comprising an antifog overcoat layer (0014, 0161, 0254-0256) comprising 0.001 to 10% by weight of antibacterial agent such as a quaternary ammonium salt, i.e. cationic organic compound, to obtain antibacterial properties (0150-0161).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the antibacterial agent of Tanaka in the antifog layer of Kawai to obtain antibacterial properties.
Regarding claims 2-3, Kawai in view of Tanaka discloses the spectacle lens of claim 1 wherein the antifog layer is a layer formed of a coating composition comprising a methacrylic resin (0013) and antibacterial agent (Tanaka: 0150-0161).
Regarding claim 4, Kawai in view of Tanaka discloses the spectacle lens of claim 1 wherein the antifog layer is a cured product of a coating composition containing component A wherein the component A comprises a methacrylic resin A having a constitutional unit derived from a monomer represented by the general formula 1 (0013), a constituent unit derived from monomer represented by the general formula 2 (0013), a constituent unit derived from a hydroxyalkyl acrylate (0013) and a constituent unit derived from a monomer represented by formula 3 (0013), component B comprising a polyol compound (0013), component C comprising polyfunctional isocyanate compound C (0013) and component D comprising antibacterial agent (Tanaka: 0150-0161).
Regarding claim 8, Kawai in view of Tanaka discloses the spectacle lens of claim 1 wherein Kawai discloses that undercoating layer is optional (0087) therefore it is clear that when the undercoating layer is not present, it meets presently claimed limitation of the substrate and the antifog layer are directly applied.
Although Kawai does not disclose lamination, it is noted that “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process”, In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Further, “although produced by a different process, the burden shifts to applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product”, In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 798, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir.1983). See MPEP 2113.
Therefore, absent evidence of criticality regarding the presently claimed process and given that Kawai in view of Tanaka meets the requirements of the claimed spectacle lens, Kawai in view of Tanaka clearly meets the requirements of the present claims.
Regarding claim 10, Kawai in view of Tanaka discloses the spectacle lens of claim 1 wherein given that there is no layer present on the antifog layer of Kawai, it is clear that the antifog layer of Kawai in view of Tanaka is an outermost layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMIR SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-1143. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/SAMIR SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights