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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/13/2024, 08/15/2025, and 02/13/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered 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 14-19 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.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the inner barrier layer" in line 7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, “the inner barrier layer” will be read as “an inner barrier layer”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “an inner barrier layer”, however this element has already been introduced in claim 14. For examination purposes, “an inner barrier layer” will be read as “the inner barrier layer”.
Claims 15-19 are dependent on claim 14, and therefore inherit at least the same deficiencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Laloyaux et al. (2025/0026109).
Regarding claim 1, Laloyaux discloses head-up display glass (at least Figure 1) comprising laminated glass (at least 10, outer pane, 30, interlayer, and 20, inner pane) and a reflective coating (at least 50, primary p-polarized light reflective coating), wherein the reflective coating is configured to reflect P-polarized light (at least [0204]); the laminated glass comprises outer glass (10, outer pane), a polymer interlayer (30, interlayer; [0048]), and inner glass (20, inner pane), and the polymer interlayer is sandwiched between the outer glass and the inner glass (Figure 1); the reflective coating comprises an inner barrier layer ([0119] teaches an undercoat present in contact with the surface of the pane surface which may function as a diffusion barrier), an improvement layer (at least [0106 teaches at least one first layer of absorbent material; [0126, 0134-0136]), and at least one laminated structure that are stacked ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of high refractive index layers/low refractive index layers), the inner barrier layer is disposed on a surface of the inner glass away from the polymer interlayer ([0119] teaches an undercoat present in contact with the surface of the pane surface which may function as a diffusion barrier), the at least one laminated structure each comprises a high refractive-index layer ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of high refractive index sub-layers) and a low refractive-index layer ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of low refractive index sub-layers) that are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the inner barrier layer, ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of high refractive index layers/low refractive index layers) the high refractive-index layer has a refractive index greater than or equal to 1.8 (at least [0087]), and the low refractive-index layer has a refractive index less than 1.7 (at least [0089]); and the improvement layer is disposed between the inner barrier layer and the at least one laminated structure, or the improvement layer is disposed between the high refractive-index layer and the low refractive-index layer ([0134-0136]).
Regarding claim 2, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, having a reflectivity of Y for P-polarized light incident at an incident angle of θ, wherein when 60°≤θ≤75°, Y≥15% (at least [0190]).
Regarding claim 3, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 2, wherein when 65°≤θ≤75°, Y≥20%; and when 70°≤θ≤75°, Y≥27% (at least [0079, 0190]).
Regarding claim 4, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, having a reflectivity less than or equal to 15% for visible light incident vertically (at least Table 2, Rv(out) values depicted less than 15%).
Regarding claim 6, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, wherein a material of the improvement layer comprises at least one of an elementary substance of Ni, Cr, iron (Fe), Ti, molybdenum (Mo), copper (Cu), Al, gold (Au), Sn, Zr, indium (In), Si, Nb, germanium (Ge), tungsten (W), Ta, palladium (Pd), or platinum (Pt) and an alloy thereof (at least [0124]).
Regarding claim 7, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 6, wherein the elementary substance or the alloy in the improvement layer has a crystal structure (at least [0124] lists materials that are known in the art to have a crystal structure, such as Ti), and the improvement layer has a thickness of 1 nm-40 nm (Table 2, thickness values of the absorber layer).
Regarding claim 9, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, wherein the reflective coating further comprises an outer barrier layer disposed on a surface of the at least one laminated structure away from the inner barrier layer ([0126] teaches a barrier layer of silicon nitride above and/or below the absorbent layer, thus considered away from the undercoat layer).
Regarding claim 10, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 9, wherein a material of the outer barrier layer comprises at least one of a nitride of Si, Al, Zr, Ti, B, or Ni and a nitrogen oxide of an alloy thereof ([0126] teaches a barrier layer of silicon nitride).
Regarding claim 11, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 9, wherein the outer barrier layer has a thickness of 3 nm-30 nm (Table 2, top SiN layer thickness).
Regarding claim 12, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, wherein a refractive index of the inner glass differs from a refractive index of the polymer interlayer by not greater than 0.1, and a refractive index of the outer glass differs from the refractive index of the polymer interlayer by not greater than 0.1 ([0030] teaches materials that can be used for the outer and inner panes; [0045] teaches materials that can be used for the interlayer; these materials can be chosen such that the refractive index differs by less than 0.1 in order to reduce interference and maintain optical clarity).
Regarding claim 13, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, wherein a reflected color of the head-up display glass measured from the reflective coating has a value of a ranging from −8 to 3 and a value of b ranging from −12 to 0 (Table 2, at least Example 6 teaches Ra* to be 2.7 and Rb* to be -8.8).
Regarding claim 14, as best understood, Laloyaux discloses head-up display glass (at least Figure 1) comprising laminated glass (at least 10, outer pane, 30, interlayer, and 20, inner pane) and a reflective coating (at least 50, primary p-polarized light reflective coating), wherein the reflective coating is configured to reflect P-polarized light (at least [0204]); the laminated glass comprises outer glass (10, outer pane), a polymer interlayer (30, interlayer; [0048]), and inner glass (20, inner pane), and the polymer interlayer is sandwiched between the outer glass and the inner glass (Figure 1); the reflective coating comprises an improvement layer (at least [0106 teaches at least one first layer of absorbent material; [0126, 0134-0136]) and at least one laminated structure ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of high refractive index layers/low refractive index layers), the at least one laminated structure each comprises a high refractive-index layer ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of high refractive index sub-layers) and a low refractive-index layer that are stacked in sequence ([0101] teaches at least one sequence of layers of low refractive index sub-layers) in a direction away from an inner barrier layer ([0119] teaches an undercoat present in contact with the surface of the pane surface which may function as a diffusion barrier), the high refractive-index layer has a refractive index greater than or equal to 1.8 (at least [0087]), and the low refractive-index layer has a refractive index less than 1.7 (at least [0089]); and the head-up display glass has a reflectivity of Y for P-polarized light incident at an incident angle of θ, wherein when 60°≤θ≤75°, Y≥15% (at least [0190]).
Regarding claim 15, as best understood, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 14, wherein the reflective coating further comprises the inner barrier layer, and the inner barrier layer is disposed on a surface of the inner glass away from the polymer interlayer ([0119] teaches an undercoat present in contact with the surface of the pane surface which may function as a diffusion barrier).
Regarding claim 16, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 14, wherein a material of the improvement layer has a crystal structure (at least [0124] lists materials that are known in the art to have a crystal structure, such as Ti), and the improvement layer has a thickness of 1 nm-40 nm (Table 2, thickness values of the absorber layer).
Regarding claim 18, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 14, wherein a material of the improvement layer comprises at least one of an elementary substance of nickel (Ni), chromium (Cr), iron (Fe), titanium (Ti), molybdenum (Mo), copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), gold (Au), tin (Sn), zirconium (Zr), indium (In), silicon (Si), niobium (Nb), germanium (Ge), tungsten (W), tantalum (Ta), palladium (Pd), or platinum (Pt) and an alloy thereof (at least [0124]).
Regarding claim 19, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 14, wherein a reflected color of the head-up display glass measured from the reflective coating has a value of a ranging from −8 to 3 and a value of b ranging from −12 to 0 (Table 2, at least Example 6 teaches Ra* to be 2.7 and Rb* to be -8.8).
Regarding claim 20, Laloyaux discloses a head-up display system (Figure 7) comprising a projection light-source (70, projector) and the head-up display glass of claim 1 (Figure 1), wherein the projection light-source is configured to produce P-polarized light ([0220]), and the P-polarized light is projected onto the reflective coating ([0220]).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laloyaux et al. (2025/0026109) in view of Francois et al. (2024/027864).
Regarding claim 5, Laloyaux discloses the head-up display glass of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein a material of the inner barrier layer comprises at least one of an oxide of zinc (Zn), tin (Sn), titanium (Ti), silicon (Si), aluminum (Al), niobium (Nb), zirconium (Zr), nickel (Ni), magnesium (Mg), chromium (Cr), or tantalum (Ta) and an oxide of an alloy thereof, or at least one of a nitride of Si, Al, Zr, boron (B), or Ti and a nitride of an alloy thereof. Laloyaux and Francois are related because both teach a glass.
Francois teaches a glass wherein a material of the inner barrier layer comprises at least one of an oxide of zinc (Zn), tin (Sn), titanium (Ti), silicon (Si), aluminum (Al), niobium (Nb), zirconium (Zr), nickel (Ni), magnesium (Mg), chromium (Cr), or tantalum (Ta) and an oxide of an alloy thereof, or at least one of a nitride of Si, Al, Zr, boron (B), or Ti and a nitride of an alloy thereof (at least [0056] teaches a diffusion barrier made of TiO2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Laloyaux to incorporate the teachings of Francois and provide wherein a material of the inner barrier layer comprises at least one of an oxide of zinc (Zn), tin (Sn), titanium (Ti), silicon (Si), aluminum (Al), niobium (Nb), zirconium (Zr), nickel (Ni), magnesium (Mg), chromium (Cr), or tantalum (Ta) and an oxide of an alloy thereof, or at least one of a nitride of Si, Al, Zr, boron (B), or Ti and a nitride of an alloy thereof. Doing so would allow for improved visual clarity and reduction of discoloration.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laloyaux et al. (2025/0026109) in view of Biswas et al. (2020/0180277).
Regarding claim 8, Laloyaux teaches the head-up display glass of claim 6, wherein the improvement layer has a thickness of 1 nm-5 nm (at least [0106, 0133] teaches the absorbent material has a thickness of from 0.2 to 15 nm).
Laloyaux fails to teach wherein the elementary substance or the alloy in the improvement layer has an amorphous structure. Laloyaux and Biswas are related because both teach a glass.
Biswas teaches a glass wherein the elementary substance or the alloy in the improvement layer has an amorphous structure ([0019] teaches the advantage of sputter-depositing a layer in an amorphous state so that it is amorphous in its as-coated state and heat treated state).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Laloyaux to incorporate the teachings of Biswas and provide wherein the elementary substance or the alloy in the improvement layer has an amorphous structure. Doing so would allow for improving the overall stability of the layer.
Regarding claim 17, Laloyaux teaches the head-up display glass of claim 14, wherein the improvement layer has a thickness of 1 nm-5 nm (at least [0106, 0133] teaches the absorbent material has a thickness of from 0.2 to 15 nm).
Laloyaux fails to teach wherein a material of the improvement layer has an amorphous structure. Laloyaux and Biswas are related because both teach a glass.
Biswas teaches a glass wherein a material of the improvement layer has an amorphous structure ([0019] teaches the advantage of sputter-depositing a layer in an amorphous state so that it is amorphous in its as-coated state and heat treated state).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Laloyaux to incorporate the teachings of Biswas and provide wherein a material of the improvement layer has an amorphous structure. Doing so would allow for improving the overall stability of the layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Krasnov (2025/0153465), Tso (2024/0210688), Ayoub (2023/0408814), Dasbach (2017/0315276), and Tso (2017/0242247) disclose relevant optical devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights