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 § 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 – 8, 13 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Amin et al. (USPGPub 2015/022270 A1).
Amin et al. disclose a transparent article (Figures; Abstract), comprising: a substrate comprising a first primary surface and a second primary surface, the primary surfaces opposing one another (Figures 1 and 6, #110, 112 and 114; Paragraphs 0093 – 0115); and an optical film structure having an outer surface (Figure 6, #120) and a physical thickness of from about 200 nm to 5000 nm (Paragraphs 0007 and 0117), the optical film structure disposed on the first primary surface (Figures 1 and 6, #112 and 120), wherein the optical film structure comprises a scratch-resistant layer (Figure 6, #140; Paragraph 0124, 0132), at least one low refractive index (RI) layer, at least one medium RI layer, and at least one high RI layer (Figure 6, #130A-C; Paragraphs 0121 – 123), wherein the optical film structure further comprises an outer structure and an inner structure (Figure 12, outer structure #250 and 260; inner structure #210, 220 and 230), the scratch-resistant layer disposed between the outer and inner structures (Figure 12, #240; Paragraph 0132), the inner structure disposed on the first primary surface (Figure 12, #200, 210, 220, 230), and the outer structure comprising a plurality of alternating high and medium RI layers (Paragraphs 0121 – 123), wherein the outer structure comprises at least one medium RI layer in contact with one or both of: (a) the scratch-resistant layer and (b) one of the high RI layers (Paragraphs 0121 – 123), wherein the at least one medium RI layer comprises a refractive index from 1.55 to 1.9 (Paragraph 0122), each of the high RI layers comprises a refractive index of greater than 1.80 (Paragraph 0122), each of the low RI layers comprises a refractive index from 1.35 to 1.7 (Paragraph 0122), each medium RI layer has a higher refractive index than each low RI layer, and each high RI layer has a higher refractive index than each medium RI layer (Paragraph 0122), wherein the article exhibits a first-surface average photopic reflectance of less than 1%, as measured from 0° to 10° incidence (Paragraphs 0090 and 0091), and further wherein the article exhibits a color shift of less than 15 for all thickness scaling factors from 70-100% for the optical film structure, as measured in first-surface reflectance per one or both of: (i) all incident angles in a range of 0° to 90° or (ii) between two angles of incidence, where the first angle is selected from the range of 0-20 degrees and the second angle is selected from the range of 45-90 degrees, and as given by √(a*.sup.2+b*.sup.2), where a* and b* are color coordinates in the CIE L*, a*, b* colorimetry system under a D65 illuminant (Paragraphs 0078 – 0088) as in claims 1, 8 and 16. With respect to claim 2, the article exhibits a color shift for the optical film structure of less than 6.5 for all thickness scaling factors from 90-100%, less than 8.5 for all thickness scaling factors from 80-100%, or less than 12 for all thickness scaling factors from 75-100%, as measured in first-surface reflectance per one or both of: (i) all incident angles in a range of 0° to 90° or (ii) between two angles of incidence, where the first angle is selected from the range of 0-20 degrees and the second angle is selected from the range of 45-90 degrees, and as given by √(a*.sup.2+b*.sup.2), where a* and b* are color coordinates in the CIE L*, a*, b* colorimetry system under a D65 illuminant (Paragraphs 0078 – 0088). Regarding claims 3, 13 and 19, the inner structure comprises a plurality of alternating high RI layers of SiOxNy and low RI layers of SiO2 and the outer structure comprises a plurality of alternating high RI layers of SiNx and medium RI layers of SiOxNy (Paragraph 0124). For claim 4,16, and 17, the article exhibits one or more of: (i) a hardness of greater than 7 GPa at an indentation depth of about 20 nm or 40 nm; (ii) a hardness of greater than 11 GPa at an indentation depth of 100 nm; (iii) a hardness of greater than 12 GPa at an indentation depth of 125 nm; and (iv) a maximum hardness over all indentation depths from 50-1000 nm of greater than 14 GPa, as measured by a Berkovich Hardness Test at the outer surface of the optical film structure (Paragraphs 0071 – 0074), and further wherein the article exhibits a mean failure height of at least 75 cm or at least 85 cm, as measured according to a Drop Test Method with 80 grit garnet sandpaper (Although Amin et al. does not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to the mean failure height of at least 75 cm or at least 85 cm, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the overlapping materials forming the substrate and the refractive layers) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layers being deposited on the substrate) used to produce the transparent article. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.). In claim 5, substrate comprises the following composition: 50-70 mol % SiO2; 10-20 mol % Al2O3; 0-2 mol % P2O5; 1-6 mol % B2O3; 5-10 mol % Li2O; 1-10 mol % Na2O; and 0.01-1.0 mol % K2O (Paragraphs 0106 – 0110). With regard to claims 6, 14 and 18, the substrate is a glass-ceramic material that comprises an elastic modulus of greater than 85 GPa and a fracture toughness of greater than 0.8 MPa·√m; and the optical film structure exhibits a residual compressive stress of from 700 MPa to 1100 MPa and an elastic modulus of from 140 GPa to 200 GPa (Paragraphs 0096 – 0097; Although Amin et al. does not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to the fracture toughness of greater than 0.8 MPa·√m; and the optical film structure exhibits a residual compressive stress of from 700 MPa to 1100 MPa and an elastic modulus of from 140 GPa to 200 GPa, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the overlapping materials forming the substrate and the refractive layers) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layers being deposited on the substrate) used to produce the transparent article. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.). As to claims 7, 15 and 20, the substrate is a non-planar substrate (Paragraph 0098).
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 9 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amin et al. (USPGPub 2015/022270 A1).
Amin et al. disclose a transparent article (Figures; Abstract), comprising: a substrate comprising a first primary surface and a second primary surface, the primary surfaces opposing one another (Figures 1 and 6, #110, 112 and 114; Paragraphs 0093 – 0115); and an optical film structure having an outer surface (Figure 6, #120) and a physical thickness of from about 200 nm to 5000 nm (Paragraphs 0007 and 0117), the optical film structure disposed on the first primary surface (Figures 1 and 6, #112 and 120), wherein the optical film structure comprises a scratch-resistant layer (Figure 6, #140; Paragraph 0124, 0132), at least one low refractive index (RI) layer, at least one medium RI layer, and at least one high RI layer (Figure 6, #130A-C; Paragraphs 0121 – 123), wherein the optical film structure further comprises an outer structure and an inner structure (Figure 12, outer structure #250 and 260; inner structure #210, 220 and 230), the scratch-resistant layer disposed between the outer and inner structures (Figure 12, #240; Paragraph 0132), the inner structure disposed on the first primary surface (Figure 12, #200, 210, 220, 230), and the outer structure comprising a plurality of alternating high and medium RI layers (Paragraphs 0121 – 123), wherein the outer structure comprises at least one medium RI layer in contact with one or both of: (a) the scratch-resistant layer and (b) one of the high RI layers (Paragraphs 0121 – 123), wherein the at least one medium RI layer comprises a refractive index from 1.55 to 1.9 (Paragraph 0122), each of the high RI layers comprises a refractive index of greater than 1.80 (Paragraph 0122), each of the low RI layers comprises a refractive index from 1.35 to 1.7 (Paragraph 0122), each medium RI layer has a higher refractive index than each low RI layer, and each high RI layer has a higher refractive index than each medium RI layer (Paragraph 0122), wherein the article exhibits a first-surface average photopic reflectance of less than 1%, as measured from 0° to 10° incidence (Paragraphs 0090 and 0091), and further wherein the article exhibits a color shift of less than 15 for all thickness scaling factors from 70-100% for the optical film structure, as measured in first-surface reflectance per one or both of: (i) all incident angles in a range of 0° to 90° or (ii) between two angles of incidence, where the first angle is selected from the range of 0-20 degrees and the second angle is selected from the range of 45-90 degrees, and as given by √(a*.sup.2+b*.sup.2), where a* and b* are color coordinates in the CIE L*, a*, b* colorimetry system under a D65 illuminant (Paragraphs 0078 – 0088). However, Amin et al. fail to disclose the scratch-resistant layer has a physical thickness of from about 500 nm to less than 1500 nm, each of the outer structure and the inner structure has a total of at least eight (8) layers, the optical film structure has a total of at least 15 layers, and the outer structure comprises at least four (4) medium RI layers, and further wherein the outer structure further comprises at least four (4) high RI layers, and further wherein one of the high RI layers in the outer structure is in contact with an outermost low RI layer.
With regard to the limitation of “the scratch-resistant layer has a physical thickness of from about 500 nm to less than 1500 nm”, It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the size of the scratch resistant layer, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04.
With regard to the limitations of “each of the outer structure and the inner structure has a total of at least eight (8) layers, the optical film structure has a total of at least 15 layers, and the outer structure comprises at least four (4) medium RI layers, and further wherein the outer structure further comprises at least four (4) high RI layers, and further wherein one of the high RI layers in the outer structure is in contact with an outermost low RI layer”, Amin et al. disclose multiple layers in the optical film structures (Figures; Paragraphs 0115 -0130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have multiple layers in an inner and outer structure, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patricia L Nordmeyer whose telephone number is (571)272-1496. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6:30pm EST, 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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
/Patricia L. Nordmeyer/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/pln/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 September 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights