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 Claims 1-6, 8, 9, 11-12 in the reply filed on 06/09/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 13-15, 17, 28-33 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species and product, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/09/2026.
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.
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.
Claim 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bard et al (US-20200310014-A1) and further in view of Mauro et al (US-20140242375-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bard teaches of a substrate including a core layer (Fig. 4, glass substrate 4) and at least one cladding layer (top coat layer 10), the at least one cladding layer comprising a phase-separable glass composition [0059-60]; simultaneously heat treating and thermal forming the substrate such that the at least one cladding layer is phase-separated and at least a portion of the substrate is deformed to forming the shaped glass laminate [0067], the simultaneous heat treating and thermal forming of the substrate including heating the substrate and pressing the substrate at the same time [0017]; and etch treating the substrate [0016, 22].
Bard teaches of gradually increasing the temperature of the glass substrate [0096] to a peak temperature and held for a period of time [0034]. In related core/cladding glass [0023] with phase separable glass composition [0024] processing art, Mauro teaches of preheating their substrate [0062]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bard to preheat the substrate to control the size/density of the desired phase of the cladding layer.
Regarding claim 2, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches of cooling the substrate after the heat treatment [0060].
Regarding claim 4, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches that the heat treatment and duration control the resulting phase separation and matrix microstructure [0061]. Modified Bard incorporates Mauro that teaches different preheating temperature ranges and holding the temperature for time period sufficient to induce the desired amount of phase separation [0062]. Mauro does not expressly teach multiple preheating steps. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to experiment the number of preheat stages, preheat temperature ranges, and preheat hold times of modified Bard as relevant process parameters to control the resulting, desired phase-separation microstructure.
Claim 3, 5-6, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bard et al (US-20200310014-A1) and Mauro et al (US-20140242375-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fukushi et al (US-20180088399-A1).
Regarding claim 3, depending from claim 1, modified Bard relies on the preheating of Mauro [0062]. Mauro does not expressly teach the temperature of the preheating is at a temperature of less than a glass transition temperature of the cladding layer. In related manufacturing of laminated glass with an phase separated/etched layer [0062-67] art, Fukushi teaches of preheating the substrate [0073] at a temperature below the glass transition temperature of the cladding layer [0148]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to preheat the substrate to a temperature less than the glass transition temperature of the cladding layer to reduce cracking of the core layer [0073].
Regarding claim 5, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches of heating and bending [0050] without teaching the relationship of the temperature. In related manufacturing of laminated glass with a phase separated/etched layer [0062-67] art, Fukushi teaches of heating the substrate to a temperature [0080] ranging from the glass transition temperature above the cladding layer [0148] and the softening point of the cladding layer [0109]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to heat the substrate to the instantly claimed temperature range as known process parameter in the art.
Fukushi teaches of applying a pressure on the substrate [0084]. Fukushi does not expressly teach the nominal pressure applied. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to experiment the workable range of the pressure while thermal forming the substrate to successfully achieve an undamaged product.
Regarding claim 6, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches of heating and bending [0050] without teaching the relationship of the temperature. In related manufacturing of laminated glass with a phase separated/etched layer [0062-67] art, Fukushi teaches of heating the substrate to the instantly claimed range [0080], for a time at least 600 seconds (Table 1). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to heat the substrate to the instantly claimed temperature range and time as known process parameter in the art.
Fukushi teaches of applying a pressure on the substrate [0084]. Fukushi does not expressly teach the nominal pressure applied. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to experiment the workable range of the pressure while thermal forming the substrate to successfully achieve an undamaged product.
Regarding claim 8, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches of heating and bending [0050] without teaching the relationship of the temperature. In related manufacturing of laminated glass with a phase separated/etched layer [0062-67] art, Fukushi teaches of heating the substrate to the instantly claimed range [0080]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to heat the substrate to the instantly claimed temperature range and time as known process parameter in the art.
Fukushi teaches of applying a pressure on the substrate [0084]. Fukushi does not expressly teach the nominal pressure applied. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to experiment the workable range of the pressure while thermal forming the substrate to successfully achieve an undamaged product.
Regarding claim 9, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches of heating at which spinodal phase separation of the at least one cladding layer occurs [0060-61] wherein the heating simultaneously thermal forms the substrate [0060]. Bard does not elaborate on their thermal forming/bending step to include a forming surface with a pressure. In related manufacturing of laminated glass with a phase separated/etched layer [0062-67] art, Fukushi teaches of contacting the substrate with a forming surface at a pressure at which deformation of the substrate occurs [0084]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to bend the substrate of modified Bard with a forming surface contacting the substrate at a pressure as a known technique for thermal forming phase-separated glass with layers.
Claim 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bard et al (US-20200310014-A1) and Mauro et al (US-20140242375-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takashima et al (US-20130194483-A1).
Regarding claim 4, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches that the heat treatment and duration control the resulting phase separation and matrix microstructure [0061]. Modified Bard incorporates Mauro that teaches different preheating temperature ranges and holding the temperature for time period sufficient to induce the desired amount of phase separation [0062]. Mauro does not expressly teach multiple preheating steps. In related heat treating phase-separable glass art, Takashima teaches of at least two stages of heat treating the phase-separable composition [0040, 65] with a working example of three temperatures and hold (Table 2, Example 6 and 7). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a plurality of preheat stages to control the microstructure of the phase-separable layer [0038-44].
Claim 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bard et al (US-20200310014-A1) and Mauro et al (US-20140242375-A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Sugiyama et al (US-20130216775-A1) and Boek et al (US-20200180991-A1).
Regarding claim 11, depending from claim 2, Bard teaches of cooling the substrate after the heat treatment [0060]. Bard does not expressly teach of a plurality of cooling stages. In related core/cladding glass laminate with phase-separable glass composition [0056, 63] art, Sugiyama teaches of heat treating the glass body followed by two cooling temperature and holding times [0147]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling step of Bard to have a plurality of cooling steps, temperatures, and time to additionally anneal the resulting glass.
Modified Bard does not expressly teach of cooling the substrate under a pressure. In related reforming of laminated glass [0042] art, Boek teaches of cooling the laminated glass while disposed in the forming mold which is under applied pressure [0061]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling step such that the substrate is under pressure under the weight of the mold so that the resulting glass holds the desired shape during the plurality of cooling steps.
Claim 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bard et al (US-20200310014-A1) and Mauro et al (US-20140242375-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Imakita et al (US-20160145148-A1) and Venema et al (US-20210031232-A1).
Regarding claim 12, depending from claim 1, Bard teaches of etching the substrate with 30-10:1 hydrogen fluoride buffered with deionized water [0097], which falls within the instantly claimed range of the solution concentration. Bard does not expressly teach of the etching time, double water rinsing, and dinitrogen cleaning.
In related etching of phase-separated glass art, Imakita teaches of etching the substrate in hydrogen fluoride for at least 90 seconds [0037] followed by submerging the water in dihydrogen monoxide bath for at least 120 seconds [0059]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to clean etched/acid-treated glass by submerging the substrate in a dihydrogen monoxide bath to dissolve residue accumulated from the treatment.
Bard teaches of additional hydrophobic coating on top of their cladding [0066]. Modified Bard remains to not teach rinsing with deionized water and cleaning the substrate with dinitrogen. In related etching of phase separable glass art, Venema teaches that rinsing the acid-etched substrate with deionized water [0088] followed by nitrogen drying [0089]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to additionally rinse with deionized water and clean with nitrogen as continuation of the hydrophobic treatment of Bard following the etching and dihydrogen monoxide bath.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20050249919-A1 teach laminated glass thermal forming with forming surface contact
US-20130068725-A1, US-20150146074-A1 teaches etching phase-separated glass and water rinsing
US-20150374465-A1 teaches temperature, pressure, time for glass with multiple crystal phases
US-20170362119-A1 teaches phase separating colored glass and etching for nanoporous
US-20180154615-A1, US-20190022979-A1 teaches bent laminated glass
US-20200238797-A1 teach the same as the primary reference
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2645. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm Mon-Thurs.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/STEVEN S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ERIN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights