Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 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 applicant, regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “determine a safe-to-operate parameter of the laser device based on a ratio of the laser-output signal and converted-light signal”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In order to overcome this rejection, the claim should be amended to recite:
“the converted-light signal”.
The remainder of the claims are rejected for their dependence on claim 1. For the purpose of examination, the limitations as presented have been searched and considered.
Admitted Prior Art
APA 1: Applicant indicated on the record on page 9 of the response filed on 9/04/17 in the parent application 14/848,306 that the controller used in the invention (box 9 in Fig 5) and claimed in claims 1 and 7 is a conventional programmable logic controller as described in Wikipedia article “Programmable Logic Controller” that can be programmed in a desired fashion to control operation of a device connected to it without changing the physical structure of the controller.
APA 2: Applicant’s specification (paragraphs 0005 and 0006 of the background section) discloses devices wherein the blue light generated by a laser is converted into a yellow light using a phosphor and then combined to generate white light.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Ogawa et al. (2007/0149858) found in IDS, hereinafter ‘858 and further in view of Kosa et al. (4,994,059) found in IDS, hereinafter ‘059, and Bierhuizen et al. (2008/0142816) found in IDS, hereinafter ‘816.
Fig 6 of ‘858 discloses a laser-based light source [201], comprising:
1. “a laser device [26] configured to generate blue laser light of a predetermined laser wavelength [blue] and emit the blue laser light as a laser beam;
a light conversion device [22] configured to convert at least part of the blue laser light into a converted light [green/red] and redirect [along fiber 18] a portion of the blue laser light and a portion of the converted light; (see paragraph 0087 and Fig 6)
wherein the laser-based light source [201] produces white light [white] by combining other portions of the blue laser light [blue] and the converted light [green/red] (see paragraph 0031);
a laser-output sensor [33b] configured to determine a laser-output signal [34b] from the redirected portion of blue laser light emitted by the laser device [26];
a converted-light sensor [33a] configured to determine a converted-light signal [34a] from the redirected portion of the converted light [green/red] emitted by the light conversion device [22] (see paragraphs 0081, 0082); and
a controller [230] configured to determine a safe-to-operate parameter of the laser device based on a ratio of the laser-output signal [34b] and the converted-light signal [34a] (intensity of the fluorescent light compared to the intensity of the excitation blue light) and control operation of the laser-based light source [201] based on a comparison between the safe-to-operate parameter [intensity of the fluorescent light compared to the intensity of the excitation blue light] and at least one predefined threshold [predetermined value] (see paragraphs 0083-0084); and
collimating optics [23] to receive the white light to produce a beam of white light.”
‘858 discloses determining the “safe-to-operate” parameter by comparing the laser-output signal and the converted light signal, but does not explicitly use the word “ratio”. However, the ratio of two signals is what is meant by the term “compare” in the art of circuitry and laser controllers. Furthermore, in order to advance the examination, an example of using a ratio of a fluorescent (converted) signal and a laser signal in a similar device to determine a safe-to-operate parameter is explicitly described in col. 3 ln. 26-30 and col. 5 ln. 65 – col. 6 ln. 9 of ‘059.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate the teachings of ‘059 into the device of ‘858 by using a ratio of the laser-output signal and the converted-light signal as the safe-to-operate parameter for at least the purpose of efficiently determining if the laser device is operating within the prescribed threshold limits.
‘858 discloses the laser based light source as described above, in addition the reference discloses the light conversion device to be a fluorescent material that emits green and/or red light when excited by the blue excitation light from the laser, but does not disclose the conversion device to be a phosphorous material in a crystalline or polycrystalline state that converts blue light to a yellow light. However, such light conversion materials are well known in the art as evidenced by APA2 and by Figs 5-8 of ‘816, which disclose various phosphor plates 110, 113 for converting blue light from an array of light emitters 102 into a light of a different color (such as yellow) and combining the two or more wavelengths to generate white light, see paragraphs 0018-0020 of ‘816.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of ‘816 (or of APA2) into the device of ‘858 by replacing the fluorescent member with phosphor plates that convert blue light into yellow light, due to the equivalence of these materials for their use in the light conversion art and the selection of any of these known equivalents to generate white light would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Combination of ‘858 and ‘816 discloses:
1. “the light conversion device [22,110,113] configured, using a volume of phosphorous material [crystalline/polycrystalline plates], to convert at least part of the blue laser light into a converted yellow light.”
15. “wherein the volume of phosphorous material [22,110,113] is in a powderous or crystalline, or polycrystalline state [crystalline/polycrystalline plates].”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that “the excitation light is the converted-light signal and the laser light (blue) is used for excitation light production”, the examiner disagrees and points to paragraph 0087 of ‘858, which clearly discloses “the blue light, which is the excitation light” and paragraph 0031 “laser light as excitation light”. The reference unambiguously discloses to one of ordinary skill in the art that the excitation light (the blue laser light) is used to produce the green/red fluorescent light (converted light) from the fluorescent member.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant’s attention is drawn to the references cited on form PTO-892 in the previous office actions which lists other references with similar features as the invention. However, none of them anticipate all the features of the pending claims.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Info
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. A. GOLUB-MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8602. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MinSun Harvey can be reached on (571) 272-1835. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/M. A. Golub-Miller/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights