DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
Claim amendments filed 06 November 2025 are acknowledged. Claims 7-11, 13-15, 20-21, 23-28, 30-36, 38, 60-74, and 76 are pending with claims 1-6, 12, 16-19, 22, 29, 37, 39-59, 75, and 77-94 being cancelled.
Amendments to the claims and specification are sufficient to overcome each and every objection previously presented in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 08 August 2025.
Amendments to claims 9, 15, 26, and 67 are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) rejections previously presented in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 08 August 2025. The 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) rejection of claim 75 is withdrawn due to the claim being cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 16-18 of the applicant’s response filed 06 November 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response the applicant’s argument that Dobrinsky does not teach a UV light blocking pattern, Dobrinsky teaches the light diffusion of the brightness enhancing film is accomplished partially through recycling the light rays back into the light guiding structure as opposed to allowing the light to pass through the lens (paragraph [0043]). This changes the overall distribution of the intensity of radiation emitted from the light guiding structure (Figure 6C) supporting that the film taught in Dobrinsky occludes light from exiting the structure in some areas of the applied pattern but not others. Figure 6B exemplifies the paths taken by light rays in the invention taught by Dobrinsky. Path A the light is blocked from exiting the structure while in Path D the ray escapes the structure. In response to the applicant’s argument that Dobrinsky does not teach configuring the pattern to even out UV light incident with the lends over its surface and prevent UV light from concentrating toward a certain portion, Dobrinsky teaches that total internal reflection is used to propagate the light rays through the light guiding structure while retaining intensity (paragraph [0040]). Additionally, light sources are placed within the light guiding structure based on the desired uniformity of illumination (paragraph [0039]). Following the above logic, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 7-11 and 13-15 are maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 18-20 of the applicant’s response, filed 06 November 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 20 and 26 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky in view of Negley (US 20120236572 A1).
The additional limitation of “a solid UV-C transmissive lens body” is sufficient to differentiate the current invention over Dobrinsky. However, Negley teaches a solid UV-C lens body with diffusive additives incorporated into the lens (abstract). Therefore, a combination of Dobrinsky and Negley would render the current invention obvious.
Following the above logic, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 21, 23, 25, 27-28, and 32-33 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky in view of Negley. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 24 and 31 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky and Negley in view of Toita.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 18-20 of the applicant’s response, filed 06 November 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 34 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky in view of Negley and Gross (US 20180236113 A1).
The additional limitations of “a solid UV-C light medium” and “a combination of curvature of the UV light input surface, curvature of the UV light output surface, and surface texture of the UV light output surface” was sufficient to differentiate the current invention over Dobrinsky. However, Negley teaches a solid UV-C lens body with diffusive additives incorporated into the lens (abstract), and Gross teaches adjusting the curvature of the waveguide surfaces to manipulate the light within the waveguide (paragraph [0143]). Therefore, a combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia would render the current invention obvious.
Following the above logic, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 35-36 and 38 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky in view of Negley and Gross.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 18-20 of the applicant’s response, filed 06 November 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 60 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky in view of Negley and Garcia.
The additional limitation of “a solid UV-C transmissive lens body” is sufficient to differentiate the current invention over Dobrinsky and Garcia. However, Negley teaches a solid UV-C lens body with diffusive additives incorporated into the lens (abstract). Therefore, a combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia would render the current invention obvious.
Following the above logic, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 67-68 and 70-71 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky in view of Negley and Garcia. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 61-66, and 69 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia in view of Richner. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 72-73 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia in view of Ruckman and Shr. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 74 and 76 are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 with respect to Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia in view of Ruckman.
The rejections of claims 12, 22, 29, 37, and 75 are withdrawn due to the claims being cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 7-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dobrinsky (US 20160074548 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Dobrinsky teaches a patterned lens for a UV disinfection device (diffusive element formed from surface patterning, paragraph [0035], and UV disinfection system, paragraph [0052]), the pattern lens comprising: a lens (light guiding structure with diffusive element, abstract); and a UV blocking pattern in the form of a film or coating (brightness enhancing film embossed or printed over light guiding layer, paragraph [0043]) applied to a surface of the lens (diffusive element formed from surface patterning or fused to the surface, paragraph [0035]), the UV blocking pattern configured to even out UV light incident with the lens over its surface and prevent UV light from concentrating toward a certain portion (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract, and total internal reflection is used to propagate the light rays through the light guiding structure while retaining intensity, paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 8, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the UV blocking patten results in a relatively uniform light distribution through the lens, which reduces UV hot spots in the lens (diffusive elements arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the shape, size, and material of the UV blocking pattern are selected such that the UV light patten produced by the UV light passing through the UV blocking pattern and the lens is generally uniform (each diffusive element diffuses light within forty percent of Lambertian distribution and arranged based on desired uniformity of diffused light, paragraph [0008]).
Regarding claim 10, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the characteristics of the UV blocking pattern are selected according to the shape of the UV source (diffusive element corresponds to a light source which can have any desired shape, paragraph [0028], and diffusive elements can have any various shape, paragraph [0035]).
Regarding claim 11, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the characteristics of the UV blocking patterns are selected according to at least one of a measured UV light output mapping of the UV source and a simulated UV light output mapping of the UV source in a virtual environment (computer system adjusts the pattern or intensity of UV radiation source based on environment data from feedback component, paragraph [0067]).
Regarding claim 13, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the UV blocking pattern includes a UV-opaque film joined to the lens, the film including apertures formed to define the UV blocking pattern (Figure 6B exemplifying brightening film blocking some light from leaving the surface “path A” while allowing other light to escape “path D”, paragraph [0043]).
Regarding claim 14, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the UV blocking pattern includes a plurality of zones with different optical characteristics (secondary region can be fabricated on a different material from a material utilized to form main light guiding region. Secondary region has a higher transparency than the main light guiding region, paragraph [0042]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky in view of Toita (US 20150287894 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Dobrinsky teaches wherein the plurality of zones includes a primary zone that receives higher intensity UV light and a secondary zone that receives lower intensity UV light (one region is constructed on a material with a higher UV transparency than the other region, paragraph [0042]), but does not teach wherein the plurality of zones cooperate such that UV light passing through the patterned lens in each respective zone remains below a threshold level capable of deforming, damaging, or discoloring the UV lens through normal use in a UV disinfection system. However, Toita teaches wherein the plurality of zones cooperate such that UV light passing through the patterned lens in each respective zone remains below a threshold level capable of deforming, damaging, or discoloring the UV lens through normal use in a UV disinfection system (barrier layer prevents transmission and prevents deterioration and cracking, paragraph [0005]).
Dobrinsky and Toita are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of lensed UV devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the UV disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky with a UV transmission below a level that would damage the UV lens taught by Toita because Toita teaches such encapsulation would prevent mechanical failure of the UV device (paragraph [0005]).
Claims 20-21, 23, 25-28, 30, and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky in view of Negley (US 20120236572 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Dobrinsky teaches a composite lens for use with a UV disinfection device (plurality of light guiding layers implemented as part of a disinfection system, abstract, and UV disinfection system, paragraph [0052]), the composite lens comprising: a UVC transmissive lens body including a first lens portion and a second lens portion (main light guiding region, and secondary lens, paragraph [0042]), wherein the first lens portion has a first UVC transmissivity level different than the first UVC transmissivity level (secondary region formed of a material with a higher UV transparency than the main region, paragraph [0042]), wherein at least one of the first lens portion or the second lens portion include a material loaded with an additive to provide at least part of the difference between the first UVC transmissivity level and the second UVC transmissivity level (Figure 7 layer “22D” is a diffusive layer or UV transparent liquid and “22H” is a diffusive layer of different liquid with diffusive elements suspended in the liquid), and wherein the first portion and the second lens portion cooperate to reduce or prevent UV hot spots during normal use of the UV disinfection device (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract, and total internal reflection is used to propagate the light rays through the light guiding structure while retaining intensity, paragraph [0040]), but does not teach a solid UVC transmissive lens body. However, Negley teaches a solid UVC transmissive lens body (to form composite lens a resin of thermoplastic material is formed in the desired shape of a lens, abstract).
Dobrinsky and Negley are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of ultraviolet composite lens devices. Therefore, as Negley teaches the addition of diffusal additives into the solid layers of the lens body (abstract), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art exchange the fluid layers of Dobrinsky with the solid lens layers taught by Negley with a reasonable expectation of success through simple substitution of parts (See MPEP 2143 I (B)).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the properties of the material of the first lens portion and the second lens portion are selected, at least in part, by one or more of applying different UV blocking patterns to the first lens portion and the second lens portion, or varying one or more of material type, thickness, shape, and surface texture of the first lens portion and the second lens portion (secondary region can be fabricated on a different material from a material utilized to form main light guiding region. Secondary region has a higher transparency than the main light guiding region, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the position of the second lens portion is offset with respect to the first lens portion (Figure 5B secondary region “17B” set farther away from the light source than main region “17A”, Dobrinsky) in order to generate a generally uniform UV light pattern when the composite lens is installed in a UV disinfection device (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light in disinfection system, abstract, Dobrinsky) oriented at an angle with respect to the target disinfection surface (secondary region 17B results in the redirection of the UV radiation, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the first lens portion is generally cuboid shaped and the second lens portion is generally in the shape of an elliptical cylinder (main region has a constant diameter and can be rectangular in shape and the secondary region can have a decreasing diameter and be elliptical or circular in shape, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 26, Dobrinsky teaches a UV disinfection device (abstract) comprising: a housing (enclosure, paragraph [0052]); a UV-C source installed within said housing (illuminator including a UV illuminator (paragraph [0052], ultraviolet-C radiation having a wavelength from 100-280nm, paragraph [0025]), said UV-C source configured to emit UV-C light for disinfecting a target disinfection area outside of the UV disinfection device (emit diffusive UV radiation directed at a unique surface or object to be disinfected, paragraph [0053]); a reflector installed within said housing (reflective material can form or be coated on any of the layers in the device, paragraph [0037]), said UV-C reflector configured to reflect UV-C light emitted from said UV-C source (reflective coating can be highly ultraviolet reflective ePTFE, paragraph [0037]); a composite lens joined with the housing and positioned between said UV-C source and the target disinfection area outside of the UV disinfection device (plurality of light guiding layers implemented as part of a disinfection system, abstract, and UV disinfection system, paragraph [0052]), wherein said composite lens, is configured to produce a UV light pattern with reduced intensity closer to the UV source and provide an overall energy output pattern to a target distance and dosage with a generally uniform intensity pattern (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract), the composite lens including: a UVC transmissive lens body including a first lens portion and a second lens portion (main light guiding region, and secondary lens, paragraph [0042]), wherein the first lens portion has a first UVC transmissivity level different than the first UVC transmissivity level (secondary region formed of a material with a higher UV transparency than the main region, paragraph [0042]), wherein at least one of the first lens portion or the second lens portion include a material loaded with an additive to provide at least part of the difference between the first UVC transmissivity level and the second UVC transmissivity level (Figure 7 layer “22D” is a diffusive layer or UV transparent liquid and “22H” is a diffusive layer of different liquid with diffusive elements suspended in the liquid), and wherein the first portion and the second lens portion cooperate to reduce or prevent UV hot spots during normal use of the UV disinfection device (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract, and total internal reflection is used to propagate the light rays through the light guiding structure while retaining intensity, paragraph [0040]), but does not teach a solid UVC transmissive lens body. However, Negley teaches a solid UVC transmissive lens body (to form composite lens a resin of thermoplastic material is formed in the desired shape of a lens, abstract).
Dobrinsky and Negley are considered analogous to the current invention as discussed above. Therefore, as Negley teaches the addition of diffusal additives into the solid layers of the lens body (abstract), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art exchange the fluid layers of Dobrinsky with the solid lens layers taught by Negley with a reasonable expectation of success through simple substitution of parts (See MPEP 2143 I (B)).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the UV source is positioned offset from the target disinfection area (Figure 8 UV source “12” as an offset from the target surface “1”, Dobrinsky) and the disinfection device, including the composite lens, is positioned at a non-perpendicular angle relative to the target disinfection area (Figure 9 disinfection device “10D” at a hinged angle from the target surface “1”, Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 28, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the properties of the material of the first lens portion and the second lens portion are selected, at least in part, by one or more of applying different UV blocking patters to the first lens portion and the second lens portion, varying one or more material type, thickness, shape, and texture of the first lens portion and the second lens portion (secondary region can be fabricated on a different material from a material utilized to form main light guiding region. Secondary region has a higher transparency than the main light guiding region, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the position of the second lens portion is offset with respect to the first lens portion (Figure 5B secondary region “17B” set farther away from the light source than main region “17A”, Dobrinsky) in order to generate a generally uniform UV light pattern when the composite lens is installed in a UV disinfection device (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light in disinfection system, abstract, Dobrinsky) oriented at an angle with respect to the target disinfection surface (secondary region 17B results in the redirection of the UV radiation, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the first lens portion is generally cuboid shaped and the second lens portion is generally in the shape of an elliptical cylinder (main region has a constant diameter and can be rectangular in shape and the secondary region can have a decreasing diameter and be elliptical or circular in shape, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches wherein the first lens portion includes a supplemental prism that juts inward away from the target disinfection area (Figure 5B region “17B” has a wedge shape with a larger diameter extending away from the target surface) configured to creating a more uniform light distribution at the target disinfection area (arranged based on the desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract, Dobrinsky).
Claims 24 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky and Negley in view of Toita.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the secondary lens is an insert held in place by the primary lens with a pair of fingers that at least partially surround the secondary lens. However, Toita teaches wherein the secondary lens is an insert held in place by the primary lens with a pair of fingers that at least partially surround the secondary lens (Figure 2 lens “210” held in place by barrier layer “225” surrounding the lens “210”).
Dobrinsky, Negley, and Toita are considered analogous to the current invention as discussed above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to the combine the UV disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky and Negley with the lens configuration taught by Toita because Toita teaches this configuration prevents the detachment of the secondary lens from the UV source (paragraph [0031]).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Dobrinsky and Negley teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the secondary lens is an insert held in place by the primary lens with a pair of fingers that at least partially surround the secondary lens. However, Toita teaches wherein the secondary lens is an insert held in place by the primary lens with a pair of fingers that at least partially surround the secondary lens (Figure 2 lens “210” held in place by barrier layer “225” surrounding the lens “210”).
Dobrinsky, Negley, and Toita are considered analogous to the current invention as discussed above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to the combine the UV disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky and Negley with the lens configuration taught by Toita because Toita teaches this configuration prevents the detachment of the secondary lens from the UV source (paragraph [0031]).
Claims 34-36 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky in view of Negley and Gross (US 20180236113 A1).
Regarding claim 34, Dobrinsky teaches a variable thickness lens for a UV disinfection device (light guiding structure with variable diameter, paragraph [0041]), the variable thickness lens comprising: a UV light input surface (Figure 5B light enters through region “17A”); a UV light output surface (Figure 5B light emission surface “14B”); and a UV light medium between the UV light input surface and the UV light output surface (Figure 5B light guiding structure including layer “22D”), wherein the material of the UV light medium is loaded with an additive with optical altering properties (light guiding structure includes a set of diffusive elements, paragraph [0035]), wherein the thickness of the UV light medium and the additive is selected to provide pattern of diffused UV energy with generally uniform intensity through the UV output surface in response to UV light incident to the UV light input surface (increasing diameter of light guiding structure resulted in increased collimation of UV radiation, paragraph [0041], and diffusive element can be formed of any solution configured to allow light emission in a diffusive manner, paragraph [0035]), but does not teach but does not teach a solid UVC transmissive lens body, or a combination of curvature of the UV light input surface, curvature of the UV light output surface, and surface texture of the UV light output surface are selected to provide pattern of diffused UV energy with generally uniform intensity through the UV output surface in response to UV light incident to the UV light input surface. However Negley teaches a solid UVC transmissive lens body (to form composite lens a resin of thermoplastic material is formed in the desired shape of a lens, abstract), and Gross teaches a combination of curvature of the UV light input surface, curvature of the UV light output surface, and surface texture of the UV light output surface are selected to provide pattern of diffused UV energy with generally uniform intensity through the UV output surface in response to UV light incident to the UV light input surface (surfaces of the structure may be a combination of curved and planar, paragraph [0143] , and Dobrinsky teaches diffusive elements are formed using any solution including surface patterning, paragraph [0035]).
Dobrinsky, Negley, and Gross are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of ultraviolet composite lens devices. . Therefore, as Negley teaches the addition of diffusal additives into the solid layers of the lens body (abstract), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art exchange the fluid layers of Dobrinsky with the solid lens layers taught by Negley with a reasonable expectation of success through simple substitution of parts (See MPEP 2143 I (B)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the UV lens device taught by Dobrinsky with the curved geometry taught by Gross because Gross teaches the change in geometry allows the waveguide to prevent or allow light refraction as suitable to the application (paragraph [0143]).
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Gross teaches wherein the generally uniform intensity through the UV output surface prevents UV hot spots from forming on the variable thickness lens through normal use in the UV disinfection device (arranged based on desired uniformity of the diffused light in disinfection system, abstract, Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Gross teaches wherein the thickness of the medium is selected according to the shape and position of the UV source when the variable thickness lens is installed in the UV disinfection device (light guiding structure can have a cross section of any shaped based on the corresponding application requirements, paragraph [0042], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Gross teaches wherein the thickness of the UV light medium is selected in response to at least one of a measured UV light output mapping or a simulated UV light output mapping in a virtual environment (computer system adjusts the direction, pattern, or intensity of UV radiation source based on environment data from feedback component, paragraph [0067], Dobrinsky).
Claims 60, 67-68, and 70-71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky in view of Negley and Garcia (US 20090114854 A1).
Regarding claim 60, Dobrinsky teaches a UV disinfection device (abstract) comprising: a housing (enclosure, paragraph [0052]); a UV-C source installed within said housing (illuminator including a UV illuminator (paragraph [0052], ultraviolet-C radiation having a wavelength from 100-280nm, paragraph [0025]), said UV-C source configured to emit UV-C light (emit diffusive UV radiation directed at a unique surface or object to be disinfected, paragraph [0053]); a lens installed within said housing, said lens configured to direct UV-C light from the UV light source through the opening (Figure 8 light guiding structure “10C” between radiation source “12” and target surface “1”, and emit diffusive UV radiation directed at a unique surface or object to be disinfected, paragraph [0053]), and the material of said lens being loaded with an additive with optical altering properties (light guiding structure includes a set of diffusive elements, paragraph [0035]); a reflector installed within said housing (reflective material can form or be coated on any of the layers in the device, paragraph [0037]), said UV-C reflector configured to reflect UV-C light emitted from said UV-C source toward said opening of said housing (reflective coating can be highly ultraviolet reflective ePTFE, paragraph [0037]), but does not teaches wherein the lens is a solid body or the housing having an opening or the lens configured to seal said opening. However, Garcia teaches a housing with an opening (Figure 2 lens frame “142F” for lens “147” to be installed into), and the lens configured to seal said opening (walls and lens are sealed against dust intrusion, paragraph [0065]), and Negley teaches a solid UVC transmissive lens body (to form composite lens a resin of thermoplastic material is formed in the desired shape of a lens, abstract).
Dobrinsky, Garcia, and Negley are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of lensed UV disinfection devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky with the sealed lens window taught by Garcia because Garcia teaches advantageously prevent dust or other particles from collecting on the UV light source that prevent the UV light from reaching the target surface (paragraph [0065]). As Negley teaches the addition of diffusal additives into the solid layers of the lens body (abstract), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art exchange the fluid layers of Dobrinsky with the solid lens layers taught by Negley with a reasonable expectation of success through simple substitution of parts (See MPEP 2143 I (B)).
Regarding claim 67, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the housing includes a pair of fins extending outward from the edge of the optical occlusion positioned within said opening, wherein said pair of fins are angled toward the ends of the UV disinfection device, respectively. However, Garcia further teaches wherein the housing includes a pair of fins extending outward from the edge of the optical occlusion positioned within said opening, wherein said pair of fins are angled toward the ends of the UV disinfection device, respectively (Figure 2 protruding members “143” attached to lens frame “142F” extending outward from lens frame “142F”).
Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia are considered analogous to the current invention as discussed above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the UV disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia with the protruding members taught by Garcia because Garcia teaches the protrusions prevent leakage reflection of UV light rays (paragraph [0058]).
Regarding claim 68, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the inner surface of each fin is UV reflective (reflective coating can be located over the entirety or a portion of any layer, paragraph [0037], Dobrinsky) and therein the angle of the fin is configured to shape the UV-C light pattern such that it reaches the edge of a keyboard when the disinfection device is mounted on the keyboard (UV illuminator can be permanently secured to and disinfect electronic gadgets such as keyboards, paragraph [0052], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 70, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the lens is a UV transmissive sheet having cutout portions configured to align the UV transmissive sheet within an internal cavity of the housing to cover the opening (layers of light guiding structure made with surface patterning or roughing diffusive elements, paragraph [0035], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 71, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the UV transmissive sheet includes a UV transmissive pattern to increase uniformity of the UV-C light at a target area relative to the disinfection device (surface patterning or roughing diffusive elements, paragraph [0035], and arranged based on desired uniformity of the diffused light, abstract, Dobrinsky).
Claims 61-66, and 69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia as applied to claim 60 above, and further in view of Richner (EP 3540299 A1).
Regarding claim 61, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the housing includes a plurality of directional louvers within the opening of the housing, wherein the lens is configured to direct the UV-C light toward the plurality of louvers, wherein UV-C light passing through space between the plurality of louvers restricts the UV-C light to a UV-C light pattern, wherein the spacing of the plurality of louvers is configured to increase uniformity of the UV-C light pattern at a target disinfection area outside the UV disinfection device. However, Richner teaches wherein the housing includes a plurality of directional louvers within the opening of the housing (shading cover in recess or sections of faceting, paragraph [0013]), wherein the lens is configured to direct the UV-C light toward the plurality of louvers (Figure 5 primary lens “3” directs light cone “4” through secondary lens “8” that contains faceting or shading cover), wherein UV-C light passing through the space between the plurality of louvers restricts the UV-C light to a UV-C light pattern (facets positioned on secondary lens in regular arrangement pattern, paragraph [0023]), wherein the spacing of the plurality of louvers is configured to increase uniformity of the UV-C light pattern at a target disinfection area outside the UV disinfection device (wall surface is evenly illuminated, paragraph [0024]).
Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of uniform illuminators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the UV disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia with the directional louvers taught by Richner because Richner teaches the use of faceting advantageously allows for homogenous radiation when a plurality of light sources or colors are used (paragraph [0023]).
Regarding claim 62, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the housing includes an eyebrow that cooperates with the plurality of louvers to increase uniformity of the UV-C light pattern at the target disinfection area outside the UV disinfection device. However, Garcia further teaches wherein the housing includes an eyebrow (Figure 2 lens frame “142F” includes protrusions “143”) that cooperates with the plurality of louvers to increase uniformity of the UV-C light pattern at the target disinfection area outside the UV disinfection device (protrusions create space for direct shining of UV light upon target surface, paragraph [0060]).
Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner are considered analogous to the current invention as discussed above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner with the protrusions taught by Garcia because Garcia teaches the protrusions allows for a greater exposure of the target surface (paragraph [0060]).
Regarding claim 63, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the housing is oriented such that the opening points at a downward angle (Figure 1 lens assembly “142” oriented downward, Garcia), wherein the eyebrow limits line of sight to the UV source for a user positioned at eye level with the UV disinfection device (protruding members prevent leakage of UV light rays away from the source, paragraph [0058], Garcia).
Regarding claim 64, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the housing includes an optical occlusion positioned within said opening (opaque insert ring placed in the recess, paragraph [0047], Richner), wherein a portion of the UV-C light passing through the opening is blocked by the optical occlusion such that the UV-C light is split into two disparate UV-C light patterns (insert ring can shade spatial area, paragraph [0026], Richner) one passing through the opening to one side of the optical occlusion and another passing through the opening to another side of the optical occlusion (outer part of light cone is deflected while inner part of light cone passes through recess, paragraph [0001], Richner) , wherein the optical occlusion increases homogeneousness of the UV-C light pattern at a target disinfection area outside the UV disinfection device (secondary lens achieves an overall homogeneous radiation, paragraph [0052], Richner).
Regarding claim 65, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the optical occlusion includes an aperture that allows UV-C light to pass (inner part of light cone passes through the recess, paragraph [0001], Richner) such that the intensity in the UV-C pattern at the target area has an intensity above a threshold level (configured to utilize an intensity according to a type of biological activity, paragraph [0068], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 66, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the optical occlusion includes a first aperture (Figure 2 recess opening “7”, Richner) and a second, larger, aperture (Figure 2 light cone “4” first passes through primary lens “3”, Richner) that allow UV-C light to pass such that the intensity in the UV-C pattern at the target area has an intensity above a threshold (configured to utilize an intensity according to a type of biological activity, paragraph [0068], Dobrinsky).
Regarding claim 69, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the fins limits the intensity toward the center of the UV-light pattern. However, Richner teaches wherein the fins limits the intensity toward the center of the UV-light pattern (cover can be inserted into center recess to completely shade or greatly reduce light beam, paragraph [0013]).
Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Richner are considered analogous to the current invention as described above. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia with the blocking member taught by Richner because Richner teaches such a shade is helpful when it is needed for the main radiation to be directed horizontally (paragraph [0047]).
Claims 72-73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia as applied to claim 60 above, and further in view of Ruckman (US 20050023478 A1) and Shr (US 20110291995 A1).
Regarding claim 72, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the lens includes a sheet of silicone having a plurality of apertures forming a UV transmissive pattern. However Ruckman teaches a sheet having a plurality of apertures forming a UV transmissive pattern (plate with an array of pinholes or narrow slits which the beam passes through, paragraph [0049]), but does not teach wherein the sheet is silicone.
Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Ruckman are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of lensed UV disinfection devices. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia with the patterned plate taught by Ruckman because Ruckman teaches the pinholes cause the beam to become coherent reducing the variation of the irradiance on the target surface (paragraph [0050]). While the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Ruckman does not teach wherein the sheet is made of silicone, it is known in the art to construct lens from organic material such as silicone resins (light guiding member made of organic materials like silicone resin, paragraph [0040], Shr). Shr is considered analogous to the current invention because both are in the field of lens UV disinfectant devices. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to construct the lens out of silicone to achieve the desired light transmission with a reasonable expectation of success through simple substitution of parts (See MPEP 2143 I (B)).
Regarding claim 73, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention except wherein the lens includes a sheet of silicone having a plurality of apertures forming a UV transmissive pattern. However Ruckman teaches a sheet having a plurality of apertures forming a UV transmissive pattern (plate with an array of pinholes or narrow slits which the beam passes through, paragraph [0049]), but does not teach wherein the sheet is borosilicate glass.
Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Ruckman are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of lensed UV disinfection devices. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia with the patterned plate taught by Ruckman because Ruckman teaches the pinholes cause the beam to become coherent reducing the variation of the irradiance on the target surface (paragraph [0050]). While the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Ruckman does not teach wherein the sheet is made of borosilicate glass, it is known in the art to construct lens from inorganic material such as borosilicate glass (light guiding member made of inorganic materials like borosilicate glass, paragraph [0040], Shr). Shr is considered analogous to the current invention because both are in the field of lens UV disinfectant devices. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to construct the lens out of borosilicate glass to achieve the desired light transmission with a reasonable expectation of success through simple substitution of parts (See MPEP 2143 I (B)).
Claims 74 and 76 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia as applied to claim 60 above, and further in view of Ruckman.
Regarding claim 74, the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia teaches all aspects of the current invention except including wherein the UV lens includes a UV transmissive layer (ultraviolet transparent fluid, paragraph [0010], Dobrinsky) . However, Ruckman teaches wherein the UV lens includes a UV opaque layer, wherein the UV opaque layer includes a plurality of apertures configured in a pattern (plate with an array of pinholes or narrow slits which the beam passes through, paragraph [0049]).
Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Ruckman are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of lensed UV disinfection devices. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disinfection device taught by Dobrinsky, Negley, and Garcia with the patterned plate taught by Ruckman because Ruckman teaches the pinholes cause the beam to become coherent reducing the variation of the irradiance on the target surface (paragraph [0050]).
Regarding claim 76, while the combination of Dobrinsky, Negley, Garcia, and Ruckman does not explicitly teach wherein the pattern includes a large aperture near a center of the lens flanked by two sets of smaller apertures on each side, it does teach that any suitable pattern of the collimation structure can be used to make the beam quasi-coherent (paragraph [0050], Ruckman). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to change the shape of the aperture pattern to achieve the optimized lack of irradiance variation on the target surface (See MPEP 2144.04 IV (B) and 2144.05 II (A)).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLA ROSE SARANTAKOS whose telephone number is (703)756-5524. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00-4:00.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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