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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01 July 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 3-20 remain pending in the application, wherein claims 1, 4-6, 9-10, 14-15, 17, and 19-20 have been amended and claim 2 is newly canceled.
Support for the amendments are found in the instant specification as follows:
Claims 1 and 19, regarding the first dielectric layer: paragraph 0025
Claims 1 and 19, regarding the third dielectric layer: paragraph 0067 (“over at least a portion” in paragraph 0024)
The amendments to claim 20 recite method limitations to be consistent with the structure of instant claim 19.
Accordingly, no new matter has been introduced by these amendments.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to claims 5-6, 9-10, 15, and 17 have overcome the indefiniteness previously set forth in the Office Action mailed 01 April 2026. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn.
The cancellation of claim 2 has rendered the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being moot.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 9-13, filed 01 July 2026, with respect to the prior art of Wagner have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendments because Wagner positively recites the presence of additional layers. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Medwick, as outlined herein.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1, 19, and 20 each recite multiple first films and second films. However, the films are grouped together as part of their corresponding dielectric layer and reference to these films throughout the claims are always accompanied by which dielectric layer it belongs to. Therefore, the claims are considered to be definite in spite of having multiple parts with substantially the same name.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 3-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medwick et al. (US 2002/0136905, previously cited).
Claim 1: Medwick teaches an article with a heat-reflective and solar-control multilayered coating (i.e. a coated article with a functional coating) (paragraphs 0002 and 0013). The substrate has two major surfaces with the coating on at least one of the surfaces (i.e. the substrate comprises a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface), and suitable surfaces for the coating in an insulated glass unit (i.e. an IG unit) is either or both of the interior surfaces (paragraph 0017) (i.e. the functional coating is over at least a portion of the second surface since the second surface is one of the glass surfaces facing interior toward each other, according to conventional numbering and as disclosed in paragraph 0009 of the instant specification).
The coating has a first antireflective layer deposited over at least a portion of one of the substrate surfaces (i.e. over at least a portion of the second surface as outlined above) (paragraph 0025). The first antireflective layer comprises one or more films of same or different dielectric materials (i.e. the first antireflective layer is a first dielectric layer) (paragraph 0025) and in a preferred embodiment the first antireflective layer is a multifilm structure having a zinc stannate film (i.e. a first film of the first dielectric layer) deposited over the substrate surface and a zinc oxide film (i.e. a second film of the first dielectric layer) deposited over the zinc stannate film (paragraph 0026).
A first IR reflective layer is deposited over the first antireflective layer that is preferably a metal such as gold, platinum, copper, silver, or alloys or mixtures of these (i.e. a first metallic layer positions over at least a portion of the first dielectric layer), and preferably has a physical thickness of 80-269 Å (i.e. the first metallic layer comprises a first thickness) (paragraph 0028).
Medwick teaches a first primer layer (optionally) which is preferably deposited over the first IR reflective layer (i.e. over at least a portion of the first metallic layer) (paragraph 0029).
A second antireflective layer is deposited over the first primer film as a dielectric layer (i.e. a second dielectric layer positioned over at least a portion of the first primer layer) between the first and second IR reflective layer (paragraph 0031). The second antireflective layer (also referred to as a centercoat layer) comprises at least one film where more than one film can involve the same or different films or may exhibit optical absorption in any region of the electromagnetic spectrum (paragraph 0031).
Medwick teaches a second IR reflective layer, preferably of silver, is deposited over the second antireflective layer (i.e. the second IR reflective layer is a second metallic layer) (paragraph 0034). The second IR reflective layer has a physical thickness of 180-270 Å and a ratio of physical thicknesses of the second IR reflective layer to the first IR reflective layer is in the range of 1.5-3.5 (i.e. the second metallic layer has a second thickness) (paragraph 0034).
A second primer layer (optional) can be deposited over the second IR reflective layer (i.e. is positioned over at least a portion of the second metallic layer) (paragraph 0035).
Medwick teaches a third antireflective layer deposited over the second primer layer and is preferably one or more metal oxides as outlined for the first antireflective layer (i.e. the third antireflective layer is a third dielectric layer) (paragraph 0036). The third antireflective film includes a zinc oxide film deposited over the second primer layer (i.e. over at least a portion of the second primer layer) and a zinc stannate film can be deposited over the zinc oxide film (i.e. the third dielectric layer has a first film over at least a portion of the second primer layer and a second film over at least a portion of the first film) (paragraph 0036).
Medwick teaches a protective overcoat (optional) is deposited over the third antireflective layer (i.e. is positioned over at least a portion of the third dielectric layer) (paragraph 0037).
Medwick teaches that an IG unit (i.e. an insulating glass unit) having the coating provides a solar heat gain coefficient of less than 0.38 (paragraph 0039). This range overlaps the instantly claimed range, and the courts have held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges overlap, lie inside of, or are close to ranges in the prior art. See MPEP § 2144.05. It is noted that as of the writing of this Office Action, no demonstration of a criticality to the claimed ranges has been presented.
Medwick teaches that the second antireflective layer (i.e. the second dielectric layer as outlined above) can have more than one film and may exhibit optical absorption in any region of the electromagnetic spectrum (paragraph 0031) but does not teach specifically the instantly claimed limitation of having five films.
However, Medwick teaches the second antireflective layer as having at least one film (i.e. can be a single film) (paragraph 0031), can be more than one film in a similar fashion as described for the basecoat layer (paragraph 0031) which is embodied as having two films (paragraphs 0025-0026), or is embodied as having three films of zinc oxide – zinc stannate – zinc oxide (paragraph 0031). In view of the variety of number of films for the second antireflective layer and the general teaching of at least one film, having five films following a sequence of zinc oxide – zinc stannate – zinc oxide – zinc stannate – zinc oxide, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as a duplication of parts (i.e. adding another set of zinc stannate and zinc oxide films), which the courts have held as having no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the coating of Medwick by including a fourth and fifth film (i.e. adding another set of zinc stannate and zinc oxide films) in the second dielectric layer, and one would have had a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 3: Medwick teaches that an IG unit (i.e. an insulating glass unit) having the coating provides a solar heat gain coefficient of less than 0.38 (paragraph 0039), and all specific examples had a solar heat gain coefficient of 0.31 or less (Tables II and III), which overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 4: Medwick teaches that in a preferred embodiment the first antireflective layer is a multifilm structure having a zinc stannate film (i.e. the first film of the first dielectric layer is zinc stannate) deposited over the substrate surface and a zinc oxide film (i.e. the second film of the first dielectric layer is zinc oxide) deposited over the zinc stannate film (paragraph 0026).
Claim 5: Medwick teaches the first antireflective layer (i.e. the first dielectric layer as outlined above) preferably has a physical thickness in the range of 272-332 Å (i.e. 27.2-33.2 nm), which overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 6: Medwick teaches the first IR reflective layer (i.e. the first metallic layer as outlined above) is preferably a metal such as gold, platinum, copper, silver, or alloys or mixtures of these (i.e. a first metallic layer positions over at least a portion of the first dielectric layer), and preferably has a physical thickness of 80-269 Å (i.e. 8-26.9 nm) (paragraph 0028). The layer thickness overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claims 7-8: The second antireflective layer (i.e. the second dielectric layer) of modified-Medwick as outlined above is five films following a sequence of zinc oxide – zinc stannate – zinc oxide – zinc stannate – zinc oxide, which is considered where the first film third film, and fifth film comprise zinc oxide (i.e. a first material) and the second film and fourth film comprise zinc stannate (i.e. a second material, and where the first material is different from the second material) and these materials correspond to the instantly claimed materials.
Claim 9: Medwick teaches that the second antireflective layer (i.e. the second dielectric layer) has a total physical thickness of less than 1300 Å, and preferably a thickness of 698-865 Å (i.e. 69.8-86.5 nm), which overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 10: Medwick teaches the second IR reflective layer (i.e. the second metallic layer as outlined above), preferably of silver but can be any of the materials listed for the first IR reflective layer (i.e. gold, platinum, copper, silver, or alloys or mixtures of these; paragraph 0028) and the second IR reflective layer has a physical thickness of 180-270 Å (i.e. the second thickness ranges from 18-27 nm) (paragraph 0034). This range of thickness overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 11-12: Medwick teaches that a ratio of physical thicknesses of the second IR reflective layer to the first IR reflective layer is in the range of 1.5-3.5 (paragraph 0034) (i.e. the second thickness is greater than the first thickness). This ratio of second thickness to first thickness equates to a ratio of first thickness to second thickness of about 0.67:1 to 0.29:1, which overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 13: Medwick teaches that the first primer layer is an oxygen capturing film such as titanium (paragraphs 0029-0030) and that any of the materials for the first primer layer can be used for the second primer layer (i.e. the first primer layer and second primer layer are each independently selected) (paragraph 0035). Additional materials for a first sub-primer layer include titanium, tungsten, nickel, etc. (paragraph 0027). The teaching of an oxygen capturing film is considered where the film (i.e. the first primer layer and the second primer layer) is deposited as a metal and may be subsequently oxidized.
Claim 14: Medwick teaches that the third antireflective layer (i.e. the third dielectric layer as outlined above) includes a zinc oxide film deposited over the second primer layer (i.e. the first film of the third dielectric layer is zinc oxide) and a zinc stannate film over this zinc oxide film (i.e. the second film of the third dielectric layer is zinc stannate) (paragraph 0036).
Claim 15: Medwick teaches that the third antireflective layer (i.e. the third dielectric layer) has a total physical thickness of 60-273 Å (i.e. 6-27.3 nm), which overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 16: Medwick teaches zinc oxide and zinc stannate as materials for the first, second, and third antireflection layers (i.e. the first, second, and third dielectric layers) (paragraphs 0026, 0031, and 0036). These materials do not list silicon nitride or metallic zinc as being required, and therefore it would have been obvious for these dielectric layers to be substantially free of silicon nitride and of metallic zinc.
Claim 17: Medwick teaches the coated article has a visible light transmittance of less than 70% (i.e. as provided by the functional coating and values quoted for a double-glazed IG unit) (paragraph 0013). This range overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 18: Medwick teaches a total solar transmission ranging from 24.80% to 26.4% (Table IIIB), and this would include transmission of the recited wavelengths but does not specify the transmission at only the recited wavelength ranges. However, transmission at each of these wavelength ranges is dependent on the materials and thicknesses of the layers of the coating. In this respect, modified-Medwick outlined above is substantially identical to the instantly claimed coated article, and therefore has substantially identical transmission at the recited wavelengths (i.e. as a material property) because substantially identical materials have substantially identical properties and functions. See MPEP § 2112.01.
Claim 19: The functional coating recited in claim 19 has the same limitations as the functional coating recited in instant claim 1 (outlined above) but is applied to the No. 2 surface of a first substrate or to the No. 3 surface of a second substrate (i.e. interior facing surfaces of an insulated glass unit as described in lines 2-8 of instant claim 19) to form a coated transparency. In this respect, Medwick teaches an insulated glass unit of at least two visible light-transmitting substrates sealed together with a space or gap between them (i.e. a first substrate having a No. 1 surface and a No. 2 surface opposite the No. 1 surface and a second substrate having a No. 3 surface and a No. 4 surface opposite the No. 3 surface wherein the second substrate is spaced apart from the first substrate, the No. 3 surface faces the No. 2 surface, and the first substrate and the second substrate are connected together since they are sealed together) and that a suitable surface for the coating in an insulated glass unit (i.e. an IG unit) is either or both of the interior surfaces (i.e. the No. 2 and/or No. 3 surface as described in instant claim 19) (paragraph 0017).
Claim 20: The method recited in instant claim 20 recites the same structural features as in instant claim 19 but in terms of providing the substrates and forming the functional coating by forming the layers and films of the coating. In order to obtain the insulating glass unit coated transparency of claim 19, the substrates must be provided and the layers and films of the functional coating must be formed as recited in instant claim 20. The functional coating is considered to reduce solar heat gain coefficient (based on the description of Medwick in paragraph 00012) (i.e. a method of reducing a SHGC of an insulating glass unit).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIM S HORGER whose telephone number is (571)270-5904. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 4:00 PM EST.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/KIM S. HORGER/Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights