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 .
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) 1-4 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagaya US 20160170105 in view of Li US 2021/0130222.
Regarding claim 1, Nagaya teaches an optical filter comprising: an absorber (glass support [0089) ; an absorption layer (transparent resin layer [0089]) comprising a dye (compounds having absorption maximum in wavelength region 600 to 850nm) and a resin [0089], the dye having a maximum absorption wavelength between 350 nm and 1,200 nm ([0089]) ; and a dielectric multilayer film (dielectric multilayer [0095]). Nagaya does not teach the absorber comprising an inorganic material comprising ytterbium but does teach the absorber can be a glass support ([0089]). Li teaches a filter glass with high refractive index with low visible light absorption [0018] with good infrared absorption properties that does not contain toxic components containing Ytterbium (see claim 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the glass of Nagaya with the glass of Li to improve infrared absorption to improve visible light transmission while improving infrared absorption without use of toxic material.
Regarding claim 2, Nagaya teaches the optical filter according to claim 1, wherein the absorber has a flat plate shape (see fig. 1 optical filter 1 has a flat plate shape therefore the absorber which is the main support will have a flat plate shape).
Regarding claim 3, Nagaya teaches the optical filter according to claim 1, wherein the absorber has a thickness of 3 mm or less [0342].
Regarding claim 4, Li discloses a glass comprising ytterbium, and the glass comprises 10 mol % or more of Yb2O3 in terms of mol % based on an oxide (see claim 2).
Regarding claim 8, Nagaya teaches the optical filter according to claim 1, wherein the following spectral characteristic (i-2) is satisfied: (i-2) in a spectral transmittance curve at a wavelength of 800 nm to 900 nm and an incident angle of 0 degrees, a maximum transmittance T.sub.800-900(0 deg)MAX is 60% or more (see fig. 8).
Regarding claim 9, Nagaya teaches the optical filter according to claim 1, wherein the following spectral characteristic (i-3) is satisfied: (i-3) in a spectral transmittance curve at a wavelength of 930 nm to 950 nm and an incident angle of 0 degrees, a maximum transmittance T.sub.930-950(0 dog)MAX is 20% or less (see fig. 8).
Regarding claim 10, Nagaya teaches the optical filter according to claim 1, wherein the following spectral characteristic (i-1) is satisfied: (i-1) in a spectral transmittance curve at a wavelength of 450 nm to 600 nm and an incident angle of 0 degrees, an average transmittance T.sub.450-600(0 deg)AVE is 60% or more (see fig. 8).
Regarding claim 11, Nagaya teaches an imaging device (claim 16) comprising the optical filter according to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHU VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1562. The examiner can normally be reached 11:00 - 7:00 M-F.
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.
/PHU VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights