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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-30 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/7/2025, 10/16/2025, and 11/7/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
In view of the amendments to the specification, the previous objections to the drawings are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 11-12, the applicant argues that the amendments to independent claims 1, 8, and 26, where each preamble is amended to recite “a light-filtering film for a display screen of a device”, satisfies the enablement and best mode requirements.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The preamble of the claim is considered an intended use of the device and as such is not given significant weight in the determination of the enablement and best mode requirements. The amendments to the claims have not changed the facts of the enablement and best mode rejections under 35 USC 112(a) as previously put forth in the office action mailed 25 September 2025. As such, the previous rejections of claims 1-30 under 35 USC 112(a) are maintained and are restated below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claims 1-30¸ the claims are directed to a light-filtering layer comprising a polymer substrate, a first absorbing compound, a second absorbing compound, and a third absorbing compound. The breadth of the claims includes any light-filtering layer that contains these elements and meets the claimed absorption and transmission requirements.
The prior art uses a wide variety of dyes and pigments to adjust the light output from a display. US 2004/0165256, made of record in the IDS filed 9/12/2025, teaches a similar device that can use a wide variety of dyes including a list of 30 suitable dyes (see Table 1 on page 3).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to experiment with various combinations of a limited set of dyes or pigments to achieve a desired spectral result.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to readily predict specific factors such as full-width half maximum for every possible dye or pigment.
The inventor provides no direction in the disclosure. The disclosure provides functional details of a first absorbing compound, a second absorbing compound, and a third absorbing compound. However, no materials are listed or given as examples for what the various compounds are actually made of. It is not even clear if the compounds are single dyes or combinations of dyes.
The disclosure contains no working examples.
Given these factors an undue amount of experimentation would be needed in order to make the invention based on the content of the disclosure, since one of ordinary skill would have to experiment with every possible dye or pigment, with their concentrations, and with their potential combinations.
Claims 1-30 are additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the best mode contemplated by the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors has not been disclosed. Evidence of concealment of the best mode is based upon the lack of any mode for obtaining the claimed invention in the disclosure. The disclosure provides no materials or examples for the various absorbing compounds.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ADAM W BOOHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0573. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/A.W.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights