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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cid-Aguilar USPA_20110297900_A1.
1. Regarding Claims 15-20, Cid-Aguilar discloses a solar control green glass composition (Title) having a thickness ranging from “about 1.6 mm” (Claim 5). Furthermore, Cid-Aguilar discloses a soda-lime silica base glass with a colorant comprising from 0.71 to 1.50 wt% of total iron expressed as Fe2O3, from 22 to 30% of Fe2+, from 0.15 to 0.50 FeO, expressed as Fe2O3, from about 0.10 to about 0.20% of So3, from about 0 to about 1% TiO2, from about 0.0004 to about 0.03 % of Cr2O3, and from about 0.0004 to about 0.015% of CuO (Claim 1). Furthermore, Cid-Aguilar discloses illuminant "A" light transmission (TLA) greater of 65%, a total solar energy transmittance (TS) of less than or equal to 60%; a solar ultraviolet transmittance (TUV) of less than 46%; a dominant wavelength from 490 nm to 600, and a direct solar transmittance of no greater than about 60% (paragraphs 0076, 0084). Also, Cig-Aguilar discloses said soda-lime glass silica base glass composition comprises 70 to 75 wt% of SiO2, 0 to 2 wt% of Al2O3, 5 to 12 wt% of CaO, 3 to 4.2 wt% of MgO, 12 to 15 wt% of Na2O, and 0 to 2 wt% of K2O (paragraph 0082). Cid-Aguilar further discloses using said composition in the form of a sheet (paragraphs 0078, 0084) and formed from a float process (paragraph 0082). Although the exact same instantly claimed ranges are not disclosed in a single embodiment, the ranges do overlap. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 21-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cid-Aguilar USPA_20110297900_A1, as applied to Claims 15-20, in view of D’Errico USPA_20150158275_A1.
2. Regarding Claims 21, 26, 29, Cid-Aguilar discloses using its invention in windshields and windows (corresponds to claimed symmetric-hybrid or asymmetric-hybrid laminated glass) but does not explicitly disclose the claimed laminated glass having outer and inner plies with a polymer interlayer.
3. D’Errico discloses a glass laminate structure comprising an internal glass sheet (corresponds to claimed outer ply), an external glass sheet (corresponds to claimed inner ply) and at least one polymer interlayer there-between (corresponds to claimed first and second polymer interlayers) (Abstract). Having multiple interlayers entails having center plies too, as is being claimed in instant Claim 29. D’Errico discloses the total laminate thickness can range from 2 mm to 7 mm (paragraph 0082). D’Errico also discloses using its invention in a variety of different applications such as in balustrades and stairs, and as decorative panels or coverings for walls, columns, elevator cabs, kitchen appliances and other applications; and that the glass plies used can be clear (paragraph 0002).
4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the solar control green glass sheet, of Cid-Aguilar, by using it in combination as a laminate, as disclosed by D’Errico. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in doing so in order to increase the utility of its invention in many other applications wherein glass laminates are used.
5. Regarding Claims 22, 27, 28, 30, and 32, Cid-Aguilar in view of D’Errico suggests its external glass sheet (corresponds to claimed inner and center plies) can have a thickness of less than or equal to 1 mm, while the internal glass sheet (corresponds to claimed outer ply) can have a thickness ranging of 2.5 mm (D’Errico: paragraph 0005).
6. Regarding Claims 23, 31, 33, Cid-Aguilar in view of D’Errico suggests using Gorilla glass for the inner ply (D’Errico: paragraph 0075).
7. Regarding Claim 24, Cid-Aguilar in view of D’Errico suggests using borosilicate glass (D’Errico: paragraph 0038).
8. Regarding Claim 25, Cid-Aguilar in view of D’Errico suggests using soda-lime glass (D’Errico: paragraph 0050).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAHSEEN KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1140. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Saturdays 08:00AM-10:00PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached on 5712701547. 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.
/TAHSEEN KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 June 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights