.
`
`Applicant:
`'
`_
`Application No.:
`
`—
`
`Adam Murano
`'
`_
`09/223,545
`
`December 30,_1998
`
`
`
`‘£3,
`BE: 0 1 mm T
`
`«c
`.
`“EV”?
`
`.
`Group Art Unit:‘ 1773
`b
`Examiner: V. Chen
`
`Filed:
`
`‘Title:
`
`A METALLIZED SHEETING, COMPOSITES, AND METHODS FOR
`THEIR FORMATION »
`
`.
`. CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
`I hereby certify that this correspondence is being deposited with the
`United States Postal Service with sufficient postage as First Class Mail in
`an envelope addressed to Assistant Commissioner for Patents,
`~
`~
`'5
`Washington, D.C. 20231
`on
`11/23/oo_ _
`5 E
`Date
`Sign re
`_
`Carol M. Brown
`-
`Typed or printed name of person signing certificate
`
`'
`
`.
`
`AMIENDMENT A
`
`Assistant Commissioner for Patents -
`
`Washington,'D.C. 20231,
`
`'
`
`Sir:
`
`.
`
`-
`
`-
`
`V
`
`g;
`I-‘A
`
`_
`.
`This is a reply to an'Officc Action, Paper No. 11, issiied by the United States Pzitiint
`\ J
`.
`_='__‘_']
`Trademark Office on October I3, 2000 for the above-identified application.
`_7.‘_'i:
`.-'~.
`Please‘ amend thebapplication as follows:
`' z .
`
`
`
`In the Claims’
`
`.
`
`Cancel Claim 1.
`
`At.Claim 2, line I,‘ delete “An” and substitute
`
`erelfor —-A--.
`
`'
`
`::ODMA\MHODMA\il\/Ianage;l77399;l
`NSP/cmb
`11/27/oo .
`
`'
`
`PATENT APPLICATION
`oocxer n\).: 2384.t0o1—0or (formerly TAiI97401pA)
`'
`'
`
`IN
`
`UNITED STATES P
`.
`
`.l\\ID TRADEMARK OFFICE
`\
`'
`-
`
`‘
`
`
`
`Wavelock
`Exhibit 1003
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:20)
`
`

`
`23s4.1oo1—oo1
`
`I
`
`L2-
`
`i%xR_K§
`
`The remainder ofthis reply -isvset forth undernappropriate subheadings for the convenience
`f of the Examiner.
`V
`V
`
`V
`V
`‘ Apglicanfls Invention
`'
`Applicant's elected invention, as tilaimed, is directed to a nietallized composite.- Inene
`‘embodiment, the metallized composite includes a first thermoplastic layer, asecond
`I
`thermoplastic layer, and discontinuous layer that includes discrete_isla_nds of metal in an
`adhesive, and which is located between the first and second thermoplastic layers.
`In another embodiment, the metallized composite includes a continuous thermoplastic '
`sheet and at least one discontinuous layer of metal within the thermoplastic sheetfi
`
`_ Advantages of Applicant’s Invention
`
`Applicant’s claimed invention has several advantages. ,For'_example_, neither
`thermoplastic layer ofthe composite needs to be polymerized in sttu, as-typically occviirsgduririg
`the manufacture of composites that include thermoset layers. Rather, thermoplastic layers can be ’
`laminated to sandwich the discontinuous_layer of metahislands. Consequently, a wider variety .
`polymers can be employed to form the composite, thereby enabling greater opportunity for V
`improving specific qualities of the composite and for tailoring construction ofthe composite for
`specific uses.
`it
`I
`An additional advantage is_ that greater thicknesses cangbe employed without diminishing
`the appearance of the finished product, as a consequence of the fact that the polymeric_ layers .
`need not be formed in situ. ' Greater thiclcnesses, in "turn, improve resistance to environmental use
`conditions, such asweatlierin-g. In other embodiments,” the first and second thermoplastic layers
`
`_
`
`can be bonded to each other bymelting, use of an adhesive, or by compression. All of these
`processing options provide potential sources for reducing the cost of production and increasing
`
`overall product quality and productivity.
`
`Wavelock
`Exhibit 1003
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:21)
`
`

`
`23341001-001
`
`i
`
`_
`Election/Restriction Reguirement I
`I
`Applicant hereby acknowledges withdrawal of Claims 4-10, 12-15, 20-21, 23-25, 44, 46-
`53, 56, and 58-60 from consideration as beingdrawn to a non-elected species of‘an elected I
`species. Applicant also acknowledges withdrawal of Claims 71 through 96 as being drawn’ to a
`non-elected invention. Applicant understands that if genericlclaims are found to be allowable, an
`examination ofnon-elected species within the generic claimswill be conducted.’
`
`,
`Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §'1 02(5)
`Claim 1 stands rejected iunder'35' U.S.C. § l02(b) in view'ofKurfman, et al. (U.S.
`
`5,115,619) (hereinafter “Kurfman, et al. ’619”) or Kurfman, et al. (US. 4,211,822) (hereinafter-
`
`“Kurfinan, et al. ’822”). The Examiner stated that bothreferences disclose a formable,
`metallized thermoplastic sheet which retains its metalliclappearance upon molding.
`' Claim 1 has been cancelled, thereby obviating the basis for this‘ rejection.
`
`,
`
`
`Reection of Claims .1-3 11 .16-'18 26-43 45 54-55 57 and 61-70 under 3-5 U.S.C.
`"Claims 1-3, 11, 16-18, 26-43, 45, 54-55, 57 and 61-70 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
`§ l03(a) as being unpatentable over Kurfman, et’al. ’6l9 or Kurfman, et al. ’822 in view of
`Eisfeller (US. 4,407,871) (hereinaiter “Eisfeller ’87l”) or Dunning, et al. (U 4,101,698) *
`(hereinafter “Dunning, et al.”). Specifically, the Examiner stated that it would have been
`obvious to a person ofordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize a
`discontinuous metallized layer as disclosed in Eisfeller ’871 and Dunning, et al. in place ofthe
`continuous metallized layer ofKurfman, et al. ’6l9 and ’822 in order to increase the fonmability,
`corrosion resistance and interlayer adhesion of the composite material while retaining a desirable
`reflective and visual appearance. Further, ‘the Examiner stated that one of ordinary skill in the art
`would have incorporated pigments and/or dyes lI'l_'0ll6 o'_r more layers of the cornposite_(Claims
`28-31, 62-66) or to "shape thermoplastic articles by embossing and/or folding (Claims 34-35, 67- .
`68). Also, the Examiner stated that it wouldgliave been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art .
`to utilize a conventional tluoropolymer such as polyvinylidene fluoride (Claim 57) depending on
`the mechanical properties and/or environmental resistance required for specific uses, and to use a
`‘o
`
`.
`
`Wavelock
`Exhibit 1003
`Page 3 '
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:22)
`
`

`
`2384.l001-001
`
`-4-
`
`conventional heat-activated adhesive composition (Claim l8) in order to prevent premature‘
`
`‘
`adhesion and sticking prior to assembly.
`As described by the-Examiner, Kurfman, ‘et a1. ’6l9 and ’822 disclose metallizled
`
`composites that include a first thermoplastic and/or" elastomeric layer, a rnetallized layer, and a
`’ second thermoplastic and/or elastorneric layer. In order to enhance bonding between‘ the metal
`layer andthe polymer layers, atleast one of the polymer layers may be coated-with_an'adhesive.
`As also described by the Examiner, neither Kurfman, et al. ’6l9 nor ’822 discloses that
`the metallized layer may be discontinuous. To the contrary, both Kurfman, et al. ’6l9 and ’822
`teach away from employing a discontinuous metallized layer. For example, as stated at Col; 6,
`. lines 19-25 of Kurfman, ‘et aI. ’6l9:
`'
`
`‘
`
`.
`
`_
`
`'
`
`I
`
`{
`
`The quantity or thickness of the metal layer in the multilayer
`composite is not particularly critical so long as the metal layer
`forms an essentially continuous film over the desired surface of the
`polymer layer and thereby provide a highly reflective surface, high '
`barrier to vapor transmission or electroconductivity as the desired ’
`end use requires.
`'
`
`'
`
`~’.-
`
`Certain.discontinuities in the metal layer are taught by Kurfman, et al. ’619 and ’822 asibeinig
`tolerable, such as pin holes that may be formed during metallization and/or during extension. For '
`
`example, as stated at Col. 2, lines _5-11:
`
`Inthis instance, it is understood that the presence of pin holes,i.e.
`those having average diameter of less than one micrometer, which
`are often formed during metallizing and/or the extension process
`can be tolerated. Such pin holes "do not noticeably reduce specular
`brightness, electroconductivity or barrier.
`
`,
`However, such pinholes in a continuous metal layer do not cause the formation of a _
`“discontinuous layer of discrete islands ofmetal” as einployedin Applicant’s claimed invention.
`Eisfeller ’87l discloses a corrosion resistant plastic object that has been vacuum
`metallized with a corrosion prone metal on a. dielectri’c_'substrate. Minute specular electrically
`discrete islands ofmetal are disposed on the plastic. A clear resinous layer encapsulates and
`insulates the islands from one another. .
`
`Waveloucki Exhibit1003
`Page4
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:23)
`
`

`
`23s4.1ooi—oo1
`
`-5-
`
`There is no disclosure or suggestion in Eisfeller ’87l of a discontinuous layer of discrete
`islands ofmetal disposed between a first thermoplastic layer and a second thermoplastic liiyer, as
`is claimed by Applicant. Further, there is no disclosure or suggestion thatthe discrete islands of '
`metal are disposed in an adhesive, as is also claimedby Applicant in independent Claim 2."
`I Dunning, et al. teach an elastomeric transfer laminate thatlincludes a layer ofmetal
`bonded to an elastomeric layer in separate microscopically discontinuous planarquantities of .
`- high reflectivity. The elastomeric layer can be a thermoplastic or a thermosetting.po1yur_ethane
`film. An adhesive overlays the reflective material to provide means foradhering the laminate to
`- a substrate, such as urethane rubber, which is a therrnoset. -
`V
`I
`'
`-
`As with Eisfeller ’871, there-is no disclosure or suggestion in Dunning, er al. of
`Applieant’s metallized composite, which includes a continuous thermoplastic sheet and at least
`one discontinuous layer of metal within the thermoplastic sheet, _as set forth in‘Applicant’s Claim
`38. Further, there is no disclosure or suggestion ofApp1ican_t’s metallized. composite, as set forth
`
`1
`i
`‘
`
`'
`
`.
`
`in Claim 2, which includes a first tliermoplasticilayer, a discontinuous layer on the first layer,
`I wherein the discontinuous layer includes discrete islandsofmetal in an adhesive, and a second
`thermoplastic layer, wherein the discontinuous layer is between the first and second
`thermoplastic layers.»
`I
`i
`V
`Contrary to the E_xa.miner’s statement, it would not have been obvious to a person of
`ordinary skill in the an at the time the invention was made to" utilize a discontinuous metallized ‘
`layer as disclosed in Eisfeller ’871 and Dunning, er a.I.iin place of the continuous metallized layer
`ofKurfman, et al. ’619 and ’822. Specifically, as disctissed above, Kurfman, et al. ’619 and '
`’822 require that the metal layer form an essentially continuous film." Applicant respectfullyrf
`submits that, although, as discussedwith regard to Kurfman, et al. ’6l9 and ’822, the presence of
`pinholes may be tolerated within the definition of a “essentially continuous film,” these
`A
`references teach away from employing a layer of discrete islands of metal, because. such a layer
`would not be considered a continuous metal layer. Conversely, as discussedabove, there is no
`disclosure or suggestion in either Eisfeller ’t§71 or Dunning, et al.
`the therrnosets employed
`as at lcastone of the elastomeric layers could be substituted with therrnoplastics to fonnl-either of
`
`'
`
`Applicant’s claimed embodiments of the metallized composite.
`
`Wavelock
`Exhibit1003
`.Page5
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:24)
`
`

`
`' 2384.1001-001
`
`._6_
`
`As discussed above, Applicant’s claimed metallized composite includes, several
`advantages associated with disposing a discontinuous layer of metal within a continuous
`thermoplastic sheet, or between first and second thermoplastic layers in combination with an 7
`adhesive. For example, the metallized composite benefits from the advantages of employing .
`thermoplastic polymers, as opposed to thetmoset polymers, both in terms of manufacture and
`use. In particular, the metallized composite does not need to be bound to a rigid component; the
`reflective properties of the composite are maintained despite repeated flexing. Also, "several
`different methods by which the composite can be fomied are available. In addition, the
`composite can be embossed following fabrication and remain reflective. All of these advantages
`are set forth in the specification at page 3, line 32 through page 5, line 20.
`
`-
`
`There isno disclosure of Applicantls claimed composite, as set forth in independent
`Claims 2 and 38, in view of any ofthe references cited by the Examiner, taken either separately
`
`or in combination. Therefore, these claims and the rejected claims that depend from them meet
`
`the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § l03(a).
`
`Reection of Claims 17-19 and 22 under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103 a
`
`,
`
`Claims 17-19 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`the references cited above, as applied to Claim 2, and further in View ofIgarashi, et al.
`'
`'
`4,503,189) (hereinafter “Igarashi, et al.”). ‘Speci-f1cally,the Examiner stated that Igarashi, et al.
`disclose that it is well known in the art to use a heat curable adhesive comprising polyurethane
`and isocyanate to improve the adhesion ofmetal and polymeric layers. Therefore, according to
`the Examiner, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`invention was made to use a known polyurethane~based adhesive, as disclosed in Igarashi, et al.,
`in the laminates of Kurfman, et al.
`’_619 and ’822 in order to improve interlayer adhesion.
`There is no disclosure or suggestion in -Igarashi, et al. of Applicant’s' claimed metallized
`composite, including a discontinuous layer of discrete islands ofmetal in an adhesive, between a
`
`‘
`
`first thermoplastic layer and a second thermoplastic layer. More specifically, Igarashi, et al. do
`not remedy the deficiencies of Eisfeller,’87l or.Dunning, et al. by suggesting substitution of
`
`thennoset layers with thennoplastics to obtain thereby a discontinuous layer of discrete islands of
`o
`
`Wavelock
`Exhibit1003
`Page6
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:25)
`
`

`
`23s4.1oo1—oo1
`
`._7_.
`
`adhesive, between. first and second thermoplastic layers‘, as claimed by Applicant in ’
`metal in
`independent Claim 2, from which Claims 17-19 and 22 depend. Claims 17-19 and 22 are not
`disclosedior ‘suggested by any of the references cited by the‘ Examiner,.as applied to Claim 2, or
`further in View ofIgarashi, et al., taken either separately or in combination. Therefore,
`dependent Claims 17-19 and 22 also meet therequirements of 35 U.S_.C._§ ‘l03(a)
`view of all
`of the references identified by the Examiner, taken either separately or in combination.
`
`I Election/Restriction
`Applicant will cancel non-elected claims pursuant to the Restriction Requirement upon
`elimination of all other impediments to allowance of the instantapplication.
`
`I
`
`SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
`
`Claim 1 has been canceled. Pending Claims 2, 3, 11, 16-19, 22, 26-43, 45, 54, 55, 57 and
`
`61-70 meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view ofthe references cited by the '
`
`' Examiner, taken either separately or in combination. Therefore, Applicant, requests
`
`reconsideration and withdrawal of the pending rejections.
`
`Ifthe Examiner feels that a telephone conference would expedite prosecution of this case,
`she is respectfully requested to call" Applicant’s undersigned Attorney at (71811) 861-6240.
`1
`
`'1 Respectfully submitted,
`
`' HAMILTON, BROOK, SMITH & REYNOLDS, P.C.
`
`
`
`_
`N. Scott Pierce
`Registration No. 34,900
`Telephone (781) 861-6240
`Facsimile (781) 861-9540
`
`Lexington, Massachusetts 02421-4799
`Dated: “lngoo
`.
`
`Wavelock
`Exhibit 1003
`(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:26)
`Page 7