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 .
Summary
The Applicants arguments and claim amendments received on 04/01/2026 are entered into the file. Currently, claims 1, 3 and 10 are amended; claims 6, 11-13 are cancelled; resulting in claims 1-5, 7-10 and 14-19 pending for examination.
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 10 and 14 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 10, the limitation reciting lines 9-11 is indefinite as it is unclear what “H” is referring to as it is no longer defined by the claim.
Regarding claim 14, the limitation reciting “wherein the thickness H of the composite multifunctional composite layer satisfies 0.08mm≤H≤1.22mm” is indefinite in light of the amendments made to claim 10 which recite that H≥0.15. The lower end of the range recited by claim 14 is broader than the range recited in claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kizmaz et al. (US 2020/0055284, English equivalent of JP 2019-535618; cited on IDS).
Regarding claims 1 and 19, Kizmaz et al. teaches a composite pane (composite multifunctional glass) used as a vehicle windshield, comprised of a first glass pane (5), a first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer), a functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer), a second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and a second glass pane (4) laminated in that order as shown in Figures 5 and 6 of the reference and reproduced below ([0009-0012, 0014-0019, 0025-0037, 0040-0045,0048, 0057-0058, 0062-0067]).
PNG
media_image1.png
403
423
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown in Figures 5 and 6, Kizmaz et al. teaches that the surface area of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is smaller than that of the composite pane (composite multifunctional glass), and an area around the periphery of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) has a vacancy that is filled by a frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) provided adjacent to the edges of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) ([0009-0012, 0040-0045, 0064-0067]). The a first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) are comprised of PVB, EVA and/or PU, preferably all three components are formed of the same material for ensure optimal bonding, and have a thickness typically from 0.2-2mm ([0044]). As shown in Figures 5 and 6, one surface of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) is in contact with the second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and a gap is formed between the opposing surface of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) and the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) ([0009-0012, 0040-0045, 0064-0067]).
Kizmaz et al. further teaches the thickness of the adhesive films used for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) are either 0.38mm or 0.76mm ([0058]). Given the options of thickness for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3), in the embodiment wherein the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1) has a thickness of 0.76mm and the second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) has a thickness of 0.38, the claimed relationship of 1.3H3≤H1≤2H3 would be satisfied (0.494≤0.76≤0.76). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose such an embodiment as described herein, based upon the desired adhesive bonding characteristics for the overall composite pane (composite multifunctional glass).
Regarding claim 2, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above. While the reference teaches that the surface area of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is smaller than that of the composite pane (composite multifunctional glass) as shown in Figures 5 and 6, the reference does not expressly teach that the area of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is 0.6-0.9 times the area of the composite pane (composite multifunctional glass). Such a modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the desired size of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer), while leaving space in the periphery to allow for sufficient bonding of the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer).
Regarding claim 3, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches that the thickness of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is 450mm (H) and the thickness of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) is 380 mm (H3) ([0064]), which satisfies the relationship recited by claim 3 of 0.7H≤H3<H (315 ≤ 380 <450).
Regarding claim 4, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, and the reference further teaches that the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is 450mm (H) and the thickness of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) is 380 mm (H3) ([0064]). While the reference does not expressly teach thicknesses that satisfy the claimed relationship of 0.7H≤H3<0.8H, such a modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based upon the desired overall thickness and bonding properties of the resultant composite pane (composite multifunctional glass).
Regarding claim 5, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches that the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is 450mm (H) ([0064]), which satisfies the relationship recited by claim 5 of 0.1mm≤H<1.2mm (100 mm ≤ 450 mm <1200 mm).
Regarding claim 7, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches that the first glass pane (5) and the second glass pane (4) are comprised of soda lime glass, borosilicate glass, quartz glass, or aluminosilicate glass and are planar as shown at least by Figures 5 and 6 ([0045, 0067-0064]).
Regarding claim 8, this claim further limits the embodiment of claim 7 wherein the glass panes are double-curved glass panes, and therefore does not further limit the embodiment discussed above with respect to claim 7 wherein the glass panes are planar.
Regarding claim 9, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches that the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is an element with electrically switchable or controllable optical properties, such as SPD, PDLC, or OLED ([0034-0040]).
Regarding claims 10, Kizmaz et al. teaches a composite pane (composite multifunctional glass) used as a vehicle windshield, comprised of a first glass pane (5), a first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer), a functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer), a second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and a second glass pane (4) laminated in that order as shown in Figures 5 and 6 of the reference and reproduced below ([0009-0012, 0014-0019, 0025-0037, 0040-0045,0048, 0057-0058, 0062-0067]).
PNG
media_image1.png
403
423
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown in Figures 5 and 6, Kizmaz et al. teaches that the surface area of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) (S1) is smaller than that of the composite pane (composite multifunctional glass) (S2), and an area around the periphery of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) has a vacancy that is filled by a frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) having a thickness (H3) provided adjacent to the edges of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) ([0009-0012, 0040-0045, 0064-0067]). The a first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) are comprised of PVB, EVA and/or PU, preferably all three components are formed of the same material for ensure optimal bonding, and have a thickness typically from 0.2-2mm ([0044]). As shown in Figures 5 and 6, one surface of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) is in contact with the second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and a gap is formed between the opposing surface of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) and the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) ([0009-0012, 0040-0045, 0064-0067]).
With respect to the limitation reciting “when 0.5<S1/S2 <0.98 and H≥0.15mm, 0<H3≤H (S1/S2 + 0.2)”, the limitation is indefinite for the reasons stated above, as the variable “H” is not defined by the present claims. It is presumed that “H” is referring to the thickness of the composite multifunctional combination layer as stated in original claim 10.
Kizmaz et al. teaches the thickness of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is 450mm (H) and the thickness of the frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) is 380 mm (H3) ([0064]). While the reference does not expressly teach the ration of surface area of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) (S1) to surface area of the composite pane (composite multifunctional glass) (S2), such a modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the desired size of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer), while leaving space in the periphery to allow for sufficient bonding of the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer).
Kizmaz et al. further teaches the thickness of the adhesive films used for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) are either 0.38mm or 0.76mm ([0058]). Given the options of thickness for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3), in the embodiment wherein the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1) has a thickness of 0.76mm and the second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) has a thickness of 0.38, the claimed relationship of 1.3H3≤H1≤2H3 would be satisfied (0.494≤0.76≤0.76). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose such an embodiment as described herein, based upon the desired adhesive bonding characteristics for the overall composite pane (composite multifunctional glass).
Regarding claim 14, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 10 above, and further teaches that the thickness of the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) (H) is 450mm ([0064]), thus satisfying the equation 0.08mm ≤ H ≤1.2mm (80mm ≤ 450mm ≤1200mm).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 10 above, and further teaches the thickness of the adhesive films used for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) are either 0.38mm or 0.76mm ([0058]).
Regarding claim 17, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 10 above, and further teaches that the first glass pane (5) and the second glass pane (4) are comprised of soda lime glass, borosilicate glass, quartz glass, or aluminosilicate glass and are planar as shown at least by Figures 5 and 6 ([0045, 0067-0064]).
Regarding claim 18, Kizmaz et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 10 above, and further teaches that the functional element (1; composite multifunctional combination layer) is an element with electrically switchable or controllable optical properties, such as SPD, PDLC, or OLED ([0034-0040]).
Response to Arguments
Response-Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejection of claims 1-19 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention are overcome by the Applicants amendments to the claims in the response filed 04/01/2026.
Response-Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103
Applicant's arguments filed 04/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues on page 6 in the composite multifunctional glass recited by instant claim 1, a gap exists between one side surface of the second adhesive film layer and the first adhesive film layer, wherein during thermal processing or high-pressure processing of the composite multifunctional glass product, the first adhesive film layer is squeezed into the gap. If the gap is too large it may lead to the formation of bubbles in the adhesive film after processing. The Applicant argues that by controlling the relationship between the thickness H1 of the first adhesive film layer and the thickness H3 of the second adhesive film layer as 1.3H3≤H1≤2H3, during the compression of the first adhesive film layer into the gap above the second adhesive film layer, compensation can be achieved for the gap above the second adhesive film layer by offsetting the thickness difference between the second adhesive film layer and the composite multifunctional combination layer, preventing formation of bubbles. This argument is not persuasive.
As stated in the rejection above, Kizmaz et al. teaches a similar structure to that of the instant claims, and further teaches the thickness of the adhesive films used for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3) and frame film (2; second adhesive film layer) are either 0.38mm or 0.76mm ([0058]), which correspond to the end points of the range recited in claims 15 and 16 of the instant application.
It is maintained that based on the options of thickness for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3) disclosed by Kizmaz et al., in the embodiment wherein the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1) has a thickness of 0.76mm and the second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) has a thickness of 0.38, the claimed relationship of 1.3H3≤H1≤2H3 would be satisfied (0.494≤0.76≤0.76). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose such an embodiment as described herein, based upon the desired adhesive bonding characteristics for the overall composite pane (composite multifunctional glass).
The Applicant additionally argues that controlling the relationship between the thicknesses of the first adhesive film layer and the thickness of the second adhesive film layer to satisfy 1.3H3≤H1≤2H3, the first adhesive can achieve a sufficient thickness, thus providing improved compression effect, reduce stress damage and optical distortion. This argument is not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Kizmaz et al. does not teach the technical effects achieved by the instant claims, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Kizmaz et al. teaches a similar to structure to the claimed invention and further teaches thicknesses for the first bonding layer (8; first adhesive film layer) (H1), second bonding film (7; third adhesive film layer) (H3) that satisfy 1.3H3≤H1≤2H3.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LAURA POWERS whose telephone number is (571)270-5624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 10:00AM-3:00PM.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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.
LAURA POWERS
Examiner
Art Unit 1785
/LAURA C POWERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights