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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 5-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0082885 A1) in view of Yasui et al. (US 2016/0185083 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Lee et al. discloses a variable transmittance optical stack comprising:
a first transparent member 311 (denoted “first base layer”, see e.g. paragraphs [0008]-[0009] for transparent and paragraphs [0042], [0052] and Figure 4);
a first stack (i.e. including at least 312, 351, 341, see e.g. Figure 4) formed on the first transparent member 311 and comprising a first polarizing plate 312 (denoted “first polarizing layer”, see e.g. paragraph [0052] and Figure 4), a first transparent conductive layer 351 (denoted “first transparent electrode”, see e.g. paragraph [0055] and Figure 4), and a first alignment film 341 (denoted “first alignment layer”, see e.g. paragraph [0054] and Figure 4) stacked in order (see e.g. Figure 4);
a second transparent member 321 (denoted “second base layer”, see e.g. paragraphs [0008]-[0009] for transparent and paragraphs [0042], [0052] and Figure 4) opposite to the first transparent member 311 (see e.g. Figure 4);
a second stack (i.e. including at least 322, 352, 342, see e.g. Figure 4) formed on the second transparent member 321 and comprising a second polarizing plate 322 (denoted “second polarizing layer”, see e.g. paragraph [0052] and Figure 4), a second transparent conductive layer 352 (denoted “second transparent electrode”, see e.g. paragraph [0055] and Figure 4), and a second alignment film 342 (denoted “second alignment layer”, see e.g. paragraph [0054] and Figure 4) stacked in order (see e.g. Figure 4); and
a liquid crystal layer 330 (see e.g. paragraph [0050] and Figure 4) disposed between the first stack (i.e. including at least 312, 351, 341, see e.g. Figure 4) and the second stack (i.e. including at least 322, 352, 342, see e.g. Figure 4),
wherein at least one of the first and second transparent conductive layers 351, 352 is formed by directly contacting with one of the first and second polarizing plates 312, 322 (see e.g. Figure 4).
Lee et al. fails to disclose
the first transparent member and the first polarizing plate are bonded to each other by a first bonding layer,
the second transparent member and the second polarizing plate are bonded to each other by a second bonding layer, and
at least one of the first bonding layer and the second bonding layer is formed of a pressure-sensitive adhesive.
However, Yasui et al. discloses
the first transparent member 3/4 (i.e. including antistatic layer 3 and glass substrate 4, see e.g. paragraph [0059] and Figure 4a) and the first polarizing plate 1 (denoted “polarizing film”, see e.g. paragraph [0059] and Figure 4a) are bonded to each other by a first bonding layer 2B (denoted “pressure-sensitive adhesive layer”, see e.g. Figure 4a, paragraph [0059]),
the second transparent member 4 and the second polarizing plate 1 are bonded to each other by a second bonding layer 2 (denoted “pressure-sensitive adhesive layer”, see e.g. Figure 4a, paragraph [0059]), and
at least one of the first bonding layer 2B and the second bonding layer 2 is formed of a pressure-sensitive adhesive (see e.g. paragraph [0059] and Figure 4a).
Given the teachings of Yasui et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with the first transparent member and the first polarizing plate are bonded to each other by a first bonding layer, the second transparent member and the second polarizing plate are bonded to each other by a second bonding layer, and at least one of the first bonding layer and the second bonding layer is formed of a pressure-sensitive adhesive.
Using pressure sensitive adhesive to bond the layers in the device has the advantage of a high light transmission, the ability to bond under light pressure, and high stability.
In regard to claim 2, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1, but fails to disclose
wherein the pressure-sensitive adhesive comprises one or more types of adhesives selected from a group consisting of an acrylic-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a rubber-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a silicone-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a urethane-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyvinyl alcohol-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyvinylpyrrolidone-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyacrylamide-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a cellulose- based pressure-sensitive adhesive, and a vinylalkylether-based pressure-sensitive adhesive.
However, Yasui et al. discloses (see e.g. paragraph [0021]):
wherein the pressure-sensitive adhesive comprises one or more types of adhesives selected from a group consisting of an acrylic-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a rubber-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a silicone-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a urethane-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyvinyl alcohol-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyvinylpyrrolidone-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyacrylamide-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a cellulose- based pressure-sensitive adhesive, and a vinylalkylether-based pressure-sensitive adhesive.
Given the teachings of Yasui et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with wherein the pressure-sensitive adhesive comprises one or more types of adhesives selected from a group consisting of an acrylic-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a rubber-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a silicone-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a urethane-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyvinyl alcohol-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyvinylpyrrolidone-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a polyacrylamide-based pressure-sensitive adhesive, a cellulose- based pressure-sensitive adhesive, and a vinylalkylether-based pressure-sensitive adhesive.
Using pressure sensitive adhesive to bond the layers in the device has the advantage of a high light transmission, the ability to bond under light pressure, and high stability.
In regard to claim 3, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose
wherein the bonding layer formed of the pressure-sensitive adhesive has a thickness ranging from 2 µm to 38 µm.
However, Yasui et al. discloses
wherein the bonding layer formed of the pressure-sensitive adhesive has a thickness ranging from 10 µm to 100 µm (see e.g. paragraph [0072]), which overlaps applicant’s claimed range. It is noted that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
Given the teachings of Yasui et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with wherein the bonding layer formed of the pressure-sensitive adhesive has a thickness ranging from 2 µm to 38 µm.
Using pressure sensitive adhesive to bond the layers in the device has the advantage of a high light transmission, the ability to bond under light pressure, and high stability. Selecting a thickness providing a good bond between the layers without being too thick would be considered within ordinary skill in the art.
In regard to claim 5, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose
wherein at least one of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate has a thickness ranging from 30 µm to 200 µm.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein at least one of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate has a thickness ranging from 30 µm to 200 µm, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., with wherein at least one of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate has a thickness ranging from 30 µm to 200 µm.
Providing a polarizing plate with a thickness that has adequate polarization while also having sufficient transmission is considered to be within ordinary skill in the art.
In regard to claim 6, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein at least one of the first transparent conductive layer and the second transparent conductive layer comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of transparent conductive oxide, metal, carbonaceous matter, conductive polymers, conductive ink, and nanowires (see e.g. paragraph [0047] for indium tin oxide, ITO).
In regard to claim 7, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the liquid crystal layer 330 comprises one or more types of spacers 332 selected from a group consisting of a ball spacer and a column spacer (see e.g. paragraph [0053]).
In regard to claim 8, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 7 above, but fails to disclose
wherein the spacer has a height ranging from 1 um to 10 µm.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein the spacer has a height ranging from 1 um to 10 µm, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with wherein the spacer has a height ranging from 1 um to 10 µm.
Selecting the liquid crystal thickness to fall in the micron range allows for a thinner device and faster switching speeds.
In regard to claim 9, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 7 above, but fails to disclose
wherein an occupancy area of the spacer in the liquid crystal layer ranges from 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein an occupancy area of the spacer in the liquid crystal layer ranges from 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with wherein an occupancy area of the spacer in the liquid crystal layer ranges from 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer.
Providing an occupancy area of the spacers to be less than 10% would result in a higher quality transmission of the device.
In regard to claim 10, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1, but fails to disclose
wherein the variable transmittance optical stack comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of an overcoat layer, an ultraviolet ray absorption layer, and a hard coating layer.
However, Yasui et al. discloses
wherein the variable transmittance optical stack comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of an overcoat layer, an ultraviolet ray absorption layer, and a hard coating layer (see e.g. paragraph [0062]).
Given the teachings of Yasui et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with wherein the variable transmittance optical stack comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of an overcoat layer, an ultraviolet ray absorption layer, and a hard coating layer.
Providing a hard coating layer provides protection to the optical stack, preventing unwanted scratches.
In regard to claim 11, Lee et al. discloses a method for manufacturing a variable transmittance optical stack, the method comprising (see e.g. Figures 2 and 4):
forming a first transparent conductive layer 351 and a second transparent conductive layer 352 on a first surface of a first polarizing plate 312 and a first surface of a second polarizing plate respectively 322 (see e.g. Figure 4), P10;
bonding a first transparent member 311 and a second transparent member 321 on a second surface of the first polarizing plate 312 and a second surface of the second polarizing plate 322 respectively (see e.g. Figure 4), P20;
forming an upper stack by forming a first alignment film 341 on a first surface of the first transparent conductive layer 351 (see e.g. Figure 4), P31;
forming a lower stack by forming a second alignment film 342 on a first surface of the second transparent conductive layer 352 (see e.g. Figure 4), P32-1, and
forming a liquid crystal layer 330 on the second alignment film 342 (see e.g. Figure 4), P32-2; and
bonding the upper stack and the lower stack to each other (see e.g. Figure 4), P40.
Lee et al. fails to disclose
wherein at least one of the first transparent member and the second transparent member is bonded on the polarizing plate by a pressure-sensitive adhesive.
However, Yasui et al. discloses
wherein at least one of the first transparent member 3/4 (i.e. including antistatic layer 3 and glass substrate 4, see e.g. paragraph [0059] and Figure 4a) and the second transparent member 4 is bonded on the polarizing plate by a pressure-sensitive adhesive (see e.g. paragraph [0059] and Figure 4a).
Given the teachings of Yasui et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al. with wherein at least one of the first transparent member and the second transparent member is bonded on the polarizing plate by a pressure-sensitive adhesive.
Using pressure sensitive adhesive to bond the layers in the device has the advantage of a high light transmission, the ability to bond under light pressure, and high stability.
In regard to claim 12, Lee et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 11 above, and
wherein the bonding of the upper stack and the lower stack is performed by arranging the first transparent member 311 and the second transparent member 321 at outer sides (see e.g. Figure 4), and bonding and sealing the first transparent member 311 and the second transparent member 321 with a bonding agent 333 (denoted “sealant”, see e.g. paragraph [0053] and Figure 4).
In regard to claim 13, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., discloses a variable transmittance optical stack (see e.g. rejection of claim 1).
Lee et al. further discloses a smart window comprising the variable transmittance optical stack (see e.g. paragraph [0040]).
In regard to claim 14, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., discloses a smart window (see e.g. rejection of claim 13).
Lee et al. further discloses a means of transportation comprising a smart window (see e.g. paragraph [0040]).
In regard to claim 17, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., discloses a smart window (see e.g. rejection of claim 13).
Lee et al. further discloses windows for a building comprising a smart window (see e.g. paragraph [0040]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0082885 A1) in view of Yasui et al. (US 2016/0185083 A1) and further in view of Fujita et al. (US 2018/0086955 A1).
In regard to claim 4, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1, but fails to disclose
wherein at least one of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate comprises one or more types of functional layers selected from a group consisting of a protective layer, a retardation matching layer, and a refractive index-matching layer.
However, Fujita et al. discloses
wherein at least one of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate comprises one or more types of functional layers selected from a group consisting of a protective layer, a retardation matching layer, and a refractive index-matching layer (see e.g. paragraph [0090] for protective layers).
Given the teachings of Fujita et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., with wherein at least one of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate comprises one or more types of functional layers selected from a group consisting of a protective layer, a retardation matching layer, and a refractive index-matching layer.
Using a protective film on the polarizing plates prevents unwanted mechanical damage such as scratches.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0082885 A1) in view of Yasui et al. (US 2016/0185083 A1) and further in view of Rietjens et al. (US 2002/0114054 A1).
In regard to claim 15, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al., discloses the limitations as applied to claim 13 above, but fails to disclose
the smart window is applied to at least one of a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an inner partition.
However, Rietjens et al. discloses the smart window is applied to at least one of a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an inner partition (see e.g. paragraph [0003]).
Given the teachings of Rietjens et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al. with the smart window is applied to at least one of a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an inner partition.
Doing so would provide a variable transmission device for use on the various windows of a car/vehicle.
In regard to claim 16, Lee et al., in view of Yasui et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 13 above, but fails to disclose
a wearable device comprising the smart window.
However, Rietjens et al. discloses
a wearable device comprising the smart window (see e.g. paragraph [0003]).
Given the teachings of Rietjens et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed device with a wearable device comprising the smart window.
Doing so would provide eyeglasses that have a variable transmission which may be used indoors and outdoors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA M MERLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3207. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00AM-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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/JESSICA M MERLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights