DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Amendment filed on 04/18/2025. In virtue of the amendment:
Claims 1-18 are pending in the instant application.
Claims 1, 6-9, 11, 12, 14 and 16-18 are currently amended.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment(s)
Applicant's amendment/argument filed on 04/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant has not completely amended the claims to overcome the objections as indicated in previous Office Action mailed on 12/27/2023. Therefore, this Office Action is made FINAL.
Note: The correction of the claim(s) should be compliant with the formation. For example, deleting of word “can” should be “as in claim 6”. The Applicant can contact the Examiner for further consideration.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 1, “;” should be changed to --:-- after “comprising”.
In claims 2-18, line 1, “Solar Spectrum Simulation Device” should be changed to --solar spectrum simulation device-- after “The” (because “solar spectrum simulation device” in claim 1 does not include upper case letters).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 6, 7, 10, 12, 15 and 16 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “can is deployed” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The term “can” should be deleted before “is deployed”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “The Solar Spectrum Simulation Device” in line 1, which is not clear because claim 7 should be depended on one of previous claim(s). The Examiner suggests that limitation should be changed to “The solar spectrum simulation device as in claim 6” because “the solar spectral measurements” is previously cited in claim 6.
Claims 10 recites the limitations “(as flowing from A to B with an overlapping effect)” in line 3, which is not clear because “A” and “B” is not defined as any related limitation(s) in the claim. The examiner suggests this limitation should be canceled or amended with definition of the terms “A” and “B” (also () sign is not acceptable in the claim(s)).
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the end-user” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation “an end-user” is not previously cited in the claim(s). The examiner suggests “the” should be changed to “an” before “end-user”.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the spectral radiation” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation “a spectral radiation” is not previously cited in the claim(s). The examiner suggests “the” should be changed to “a” before “spectral radiation”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the end-user” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation “an end-user” is not previously cited in the claim(s). The examiner suggests “the” should be changed to “an” before “end-user”.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “etc.” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation should be deleted in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
As allowable subject matter has been indicated (in previous Office Action mailed on 12/27/2023), applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Inquiry
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 JIMMY T VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1832. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Regis Betsch can be reached on 571-270-7101. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2800.
/JIMMY T VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844