Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 19/081,377

PANE ARRANGEMENT FOR A VEHICLE ROOF, AND VEHICLE ROOF FOR A VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §103§112§DP
Filed
Mar 17, 2025
Examiner
DUNAY, CHRISTOPHER E
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Webasto Se
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 10m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
539 granted / 715 resolved
+7.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 10m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
749
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 715 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112 §DP
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 statement (IDS) submitted on 3/17/2025 was filed and is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting Claim 1-3, 8, and 15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 6, 9, and 15 of copending Application No. 18/991954 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the recite the same subject matter as laid out below. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Re Claim 1: Instant Application Reference Application Claim 1. Pane arrangement for a vehicle roof, comprising: Claim 1. A vehicle window, comprising: a first pane element which has a first main face and a second main face which is opposite the first main face along a stacking direction, an outer window pane, a second pane element which has a third main face and has a fourth main face which is opposite the third main face along the stacking direction, the second pane element being coupled to the first pane element, and wherein an inner window pane, a first plastic layer which is arranged in stacking direction between the first pane element and the second pane element, and Claim 2. a switchable interlayer which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second plastic layer, the first absorption element being arranged in stacking direction between the second plastic layer and the second pane element. a switchable layer and an intermediate layer disposed between the outer window pane and the inner window pane, a first absorption element which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second pane element. wherein an opaque masking element is disposed laterally next to the intermediate layer, the opaque masking element covering at least a light coupling area of the inner window pane at which light of a light source can be coupled into the inner window pane. the second pane element is embodied as a plate-like light guide element which is coupled to a light source and is configured to guide light fed in from the light source and to provide it for a prescribed lighting of the vehicle interior, Claim 9. a light source whose light can be coupled into the inner window pane in the light coupling area via a light coupling element. Re Claim 2: - a second plastic layer which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second pane element, Claim 6. …the switchable layer lies flat on the top side of the intermediate layer and/or on the opaque masking element in a vertical vehicle window direction, and/or in that the vehicle window comprises another PVB layer, which lies flat on the top side of the switchable layer in the vertical vehicle window direction. (This is a second plastic layer.) a switchable interlayer which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second plastic layer, the first absorption element being arranged in stacking direction between the second plastic layer and the second pane element. As taught in claim 1. Re Claim 3: the first plastic layer and/or the second plastic layer is embodied as a layer of polyvinyl butyral or comprises such a material. Claim 6 teaches PVB. Re Claim 8: the first absorption element reaches along a lateral direction and has a first overlap region with the switchable interlayer along the lateral direction. Claim 1 teaches the same idea: wherein an opaque masking element is disposed laterally next to the intermediate layer, the opaque masking element covering at least a light coupling area of the inner window pane at which light of a light source can be coupled into the inner window pane. Re Claim 15: Vehicle roof for a vehicle, comprising: - a pane arrangement according to- a pane arrangement according to- a cover which is embodied to close a vehicle opening in the vehicle roof, the cover comprising the pane arrangement. Claim 15 teaches the same idea: A vehicle comprising a vehicle window according to claim 1. 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. Claim 3 is 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. In regard to claim 3, the applicant recites the limitation of “the second plastic layer.” This limitation lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examining, the Examiner will consider claim 3 to depending from claim 2. Appropriate correction is required. 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, 4-7, 9-13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Do Rosario et al (WO 2023/144172 A1)1. In regard to claim 1, Do Rosario et al disclose a pane arrangement for a vehicle roof, comprising: - a first pane element (6) which has a first main face and a second main face which is opposite the first main face along a stacking direction, - a second pane element (1) which has a third main face and has a fourth main face which is opposite the third main face along the stacking direction, the second pane element being coupled to the first pane element, and wherein - the second pane element is embodied as a plate-like light guide element which is coupled to a light source (2) and is configured to guide light fed in from the light source and to provide it for a prescribed lighting of the vehicle interior, - a first plastic layer (5-PVB film see [0063]) which is arranged in stacking direction between the first pane element and the second pane element, and - a first absorption element (11) which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the first pane element. (Figure 2; see at least [0054] onward) Do Rosario et al fail to disclose that the first absorption element which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second pane element. PNG media_image1.png 332 455 media_image1.png Greyscale However, the placement of the absorption layer is not critical to the function of the invention, it just needs to cover the light source. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to move the absorption layer closer to the light source in order to shape the resulting light distribution. In regard to claim 4, Do Rosario et al disclose the first absorption element comprises: - a carrier material (pigments) and - an adhesive layer (glass frits). (See [0071]) In regard to claim 5, Do Rosario et al disclose a heat-treated absorption element. Do Rosario et al fail to disclose the first absorption element comprises a treated surface which is a corona-treated surface and/or a flame-treated surface and/or a surface treated with a primer and/or a surface treated with an adhesion promoter. However, these are known alternative treatment means, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use an alternative treatment means in order to adhere the absorption layer to the glass. In regard to claim 6, Do Rosario et al disclose the adhesive layer comprises a pressure- sensitive adhesive and/or an optically clear adhesive (pigments carry the color-the glass frits are optically clear). In regard to claim 7, Do Rosario et al disclose the refractive index of the adhesive layer is greater than or equal to the refractive index of the second plastic layer. (Glass has a higher index than plastic.) In regard to claim 9, Do Rosario et al disclose a black print (9) reaches along the lateral direction at the second main face and has a second overlap region with the switchable interlayer along the lateral direction, the second overlap region being greater than the first overlap region along the lateral direction (the overlap is bigger in 11 on the left side compared to the right side 9). In regard to claim 10 and 11, Do Rosario et al disclose a second absorption element (9) which is arranged at the fourth main face, the second absorption element comprises a black print and/or an absorbent adhesive and/or a primer. In regard to claim 10 and 12, Do Rosario et al disclose a second absorption element (4) which is arranged at the fourth main face, wherein the second absorption element is structured in the form of dots and/or lines, whereby less light is absorbed. In regard to claim 13, Do Rosario et al fail to disclose an IR coating. However, the Examiner takes notice that IR coatings for blocking external heat and to reduce internal vehicle temperatures is old and well-known. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to install an IR coating in the window of Do Rosario et al in order to control the internal temperature of the vehicle. In regard to claim 15, Do Rosario et al disclose a vehicle roof for a vehicle, comprising: a pane arrangement according to claim 1 and a cover which is embodied to close a vehicle opening in the vehicle roof, the cover comprising the pane arrangement. (See [0002]) Claim(s) 2, 3, 8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Do Rosario et al (WO 2023/144172 A1) in view of Derda (US 2009/0046355 A1) In regard to claim 2 and 3, Do Rosario et al fail to disclose a second plastic layer and a switchable layer. Derda teaches a second plastic layer (two piles 26 of PVB; see [0054]) which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second pane element, and a switchable interlayer (see [0020]) which is arranged in stacking direction between the first plastic layer and the second plastic layer, the first absorption element being arranged in stacking direction between the second plastic layer and the second pane element, and as recited in claim 3, the first plastic layer and/or the second plastic layer is embodied as a layer of polyvinyl butyral or comprises such a material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to install the switchable layer of Derda into the roof of Do Rosario et al in order to provide shading on command. In regard to claim 8, the combination of Do Rosario et al and Derda teaches that the first absorption element reaches along a lateral direction and has a first overlap region with the switchable interlayer along the lateral direction. In regard to claim 14, Do Rosario et al fail to disclose a low-emissivity coating. Derda teaches a wavelength-selective, low-emissivity coating which is arranged at the fourth main face. (See [0027]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to install the low emissivity coating of Derda in order to provide a poor thermal radiator near the inner surface facing the vehicle. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Mooraj et al (US 2025/0102722 A1) disclose an illuminated pane. Do Rosario et al (US 2025/0050624 A1) disclose a laminated pane. Zunzer et al (US 2022/0153353 A1) disclose a vehicle glass pane. Laluet et al (US 2018/0297515 A1) disclose a black mask between the last layers of a window roof. Verrat et al (US 2015/0078020 A1) disclose an illuminated glazing. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E DUNAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1222. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am - 6:00 pm. 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, James (Jong-Suk) Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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. /CHRISTOPHER E DUNAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875 1 Please see Do Rosario et al (US 2025/0091326 A1)
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 17, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112, §DP
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602568
BORN-AGAIN TSK FUZZY CLASSIFIER BASED ON KNOWLEDGE DISTILLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601468
Flexible Trim Device for Enhancing LED Strip Lights
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595895
MULTI-REGION OPTICS FOR FLAT ILLUMINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597569
STRUCTURE FOR TURNING OFF VANITY LAMP FOR VEHICLE USING SUN VISOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595899
Mobile Luminaire
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+14.8%)
1y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 715 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month