Ex Parte Tanaka

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Aug 17, 2010

10674169 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 17, 2010)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
10/674,169 09/29/2003 Hozumi Tanaka 4410.P0626US 1955
23474 7590 08/17/2010
FLYNN THIEL BOUTELL & TANIS, P.C.
2026 RAMBLING ROAD
KALAMAZOO, MI 49008-1631
EXAMINER
HUSON, MONICA ANNE
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1791
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/17/2010 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________________

Ex parte HOZUMI TANAKA
____________________

Appeal 2009-006464
Application 10/674,169
Technology Center 1700
____________________

Before PETER F. KRATZ, CATHERINE Q. TIMM, and
JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges.

TIMM, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL1
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s
decision to reject claim 1, the only claim pending, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Cameron (US 6,979,419 B2, issued Dec. 27,

1 The two-month time period for filing an appeal or commencing a civil
action, as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 1.304, or for filing a request for rehearing,
as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 41.52, begins to run from the “MAIL DATE”
(paper delivery mode) or the “NOTIFICATION DATE” (electronic delivery
mode) shown on the PTOL-90A cover letter attached to this decision.
Appeal 2009-006464
Application 10/674,169

2
2005) in view of Tasaka (US 6,814,914 B2, issued Nov. 9, 2004). We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
Appellant’s invention relates to a method for molding a polarizing
film for use in a polarizing lens (Spec. 1).2 Claim 1 is reproduced below:
1. A method of molding a polarizing film comprising the
steps of:
applying a colored polarizing film to a molding face of a
mold;
allowing the polarizing film to be sucked onto the
molding face by vacuum suction to mold a colored concave and
convex polarizing film;
setting a tensile of the polarizing film in a certain
direction to be less than a tension of the polarizing film in a
direction perpendicular to the certain direction;
stretching the polarizing film at a position on a line of the
diameter of the mold in parallel with the certain direction less
than stretching at other positions to thereby allow the color of
the polarizing film at the position where the stretching of the
polarizing film is less to be deeper and form a reference mark in
a polarizing direction.
The step of setting a tensile involves stretching the film in one
direction more than in another direction. This stretching results in a residual
stress in the direction of the polarizing axis (X-axis), and this residual stress
acts as a tensile (resistance relative to stretching), when molding the film by
vacuum suction. (Spec. ¶ bridging pp. 5 and 6).
The stretching step occurs during the vacuum molding process.
During the vacuum suction process, the tensile set in the tensile setting step
causes the film to stretch more in the direction with less tension (Y-axis) and

2 References to the Specification are to the substitute Specification filed June
22, 2007.
Appeal 2009-006464
Application 10/674,169

3
partially shrink at a location close to the line of the diameter of the mold in
parallel with this direction (Y-axis). This shrinking results in the claimed
reference marks. (Spec. 6.) Figure 3 depicts the product polarizing film 3
with reference marks 12, and is reproduced below:

Fig. 3(A) is a plan view of the molded polarizing film and
Fig. 3(B) is a sectional view thereof (Spec. 3).

Cameron describes a method of molding a print pad for applying
colored inks to articles such as contact lenses (Cameron, col. 2, ll. 39-44). In
the process, a pre-textured sheet is vacuum molded or thermoformed on a
male mold. The center portion 28 of the plastic of the sheet retains its
texture upon molding as this portion of the film stretches less than the
annular area 26 surrounding it (Cameron, col. 3, l. 39 to col. 4, l. 14).
The Examiner finds that center portion 28 of Cameron is the required
reference mark, and acknowledges that Cameron does not disclose forming a
polarizing film or setting specific tension on the film as claimed (Ans. 3).
Appeal 2009-006464
Application 10/674,169

4
According to the Examiner, Tasaka shows that it was known to form a
polarizing film including a step of setting specific tension to the film as
claimed (Ans. 3). The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious
“to use Tasaka’s varied tension amounts during Cameron’s molding process
to obtain a biaxially-stretched film prior to the thermoforming process.”
Tasaka describes a method of forming a stretched film to obtain
particular optical properties, such as polarization, and uses this optical film
in computer displays (Tasaka, col. 1, ll. 9-11).
We cannot say that the Examiner has articulated a reasonable basis to
conclude that the claimed method would have been obvious based on the
teachings and suggestions of Cameron and Tasaka. As noted by Appellants,
Tasaka applies a tensile difference to polarize a film (Br. 5). Cameron is not
concerned with the manufacture of a polarizing film, but to forming a
textured print pad. The Examiner has not provided a convincing reason why
one of ordinary skill in the art would seek to provide the print pad of
Cameron with optical properties such as polarizing properties. We also
agree with Appellants that the Examiner has not provided any basis to show
that the combination of references provides a suggestion for providing a
reference mark in the polarizing direction of the film (Br. 5).
On the record before us, we do not sustain the rejection maintained
by the Examiner.
The decision of the Examiner is reversed.
REVERSED

cam
Appeal 2009-006464
Application 10/674,169

5

FLYNN THIEL BOUTELL & TANIS, P.C.
2026 RAMBLING ROAD
KALAMAZOO MI 49008-1631