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 .
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10,12-16, 18, 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haraguchi (US 20200329539 A1).
With regards to claim 10. Haraguchi discloses:
(Currently amended) A system (fig 14) comprising:
a. a plurality of LEDs configured to produce light that includes at least two different wavelength ranges, wherein at least one wavelength range assists human vision (37, 38; [0124]) and at least one wavelength range promotes non-visual physiological processes (237; fig 14; [0156]; see [0158] for emission being non-visual);
b. a processor (61; [0069]) configured to generate at least one control signal to control power delivered to one or more of the plurality of LEDs (37, 38, 237), the processor further configured to change the at least one control signal over time so as to produce from the device at least one lighting change (figs 13a-13e; [0069, 0095-0096]); and
c. a user interface (12; [0059-0061]) adapted to receive a user input to control operation of the processor;
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non-visual physiological processes is selected from the group consisting of:
a.290-315 nm [0171];
b.360-400 nm (237; fig 14; [0156]);
c.470-490 nm [0174]; and
d.600-1400 nm; and further,
wherein the duration, intensity or both of the emitted spectra selected from the group consisting of 290-315 nm, 360-400 nm, 470-490 nm, and 600-1400 nm, is independently regulated from the portion of the emitted spectra serving visual perception [0160-0161].
With regards to claim 12, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Haraguchi further disclose(s):
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 290-315 nm [0171].
With regards to claim 13, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 360-400 nm ([0171]).
With regards to claim 14, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 470-490 nm([0174]).
With regards to claim 15, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 600-1400 nm (750nm [0172]).
With regards to claim 16, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the user interface is selected from the group consisting of a switch, a dial, a keypad and a touchscreen ([0088]).
With regards to claim 18, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein multiple lighting changes are configured to simulate natural spectral changes over the course of a day [0097].
With regards to claim 20, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the duration and intensity of the emitted spectra selected from the group consisting of 290-315 nm, 360-400 nm (237; fig 14; [0156]; see [0158] for emission being non-visual), 470-490 nm, and 600-1400 nm, is independently regulated from the portion of the emitted spectra serving visual perception (see [0160-0161] for control of intensity and reference to “first embodiment”; see duration in figs 13a-13d).
With regards to claim 21, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the processor is configured so that emitted spectra do not exceed an intensity level that is higher than a wavelength proportion of the sun [0124].
With regards to claim 22, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the processor is configured so that emitted spectra are dynamically tuned as to achieve specific light spectra according to the time of the day [figs 13a-13e].
With regards to claim 23, Haraguchi disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
wherein the non-visual physiological processes are selected from the group consisting of Vitamin D production and mitigation of oxidative stress [0171].
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 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.
Claim(s) 10, 12-16, 18, 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petluri (US 20210402210 A1) in view of Haraguchi (US 20200329539 A1).
With regards to claim 10, Petluri disclose(s):
A system comprising:
a. a plurality of LEDs (20); [0064] configured to produce light that includes at least two different wavelength ranges (901a-901e; fig. 9; see figs 9-26), wherein at least one wavelength range assists human vision and at least one wavelength range promotes non- visual physiological processes (see visible spectrum in fig 9; [0013]).
b. a processor (fig 28) configured to generate at least one control signal to control power delivered to one or more of the plurality of LEDs, the processor further configured to change the at least one control signal over time so as to produce from the device at least one lighting change [0161-0162];
and c. a user interface (3340) adapted to receive a user input to control operation of the processor ([0146]);
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is selected from the group consisting of:
d. 600-1400 nm [0019]; and further,
Petluri does not disclose(s):
wherein the duration, intensity or both of the emitted spectra selected from the group consisting of 290-315 nm, 360-400 nm, 470-490 nm, and 600-1400 nm, is independently regulated from the portion of the emitted spectra serving visual perception.
Haraguchi teaches:
wherein the duration, intensity or both of the emitted spectra selected from the group consisting of 290-315 nm, 360-400 nm (237; fig 14; [0156]; see [0158] for emission being non-visual), 470-490 nm, and 600-1400 nm, is independently regulated from the portion of the emitted spectra serving visual perception [0160-0161].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Petluri by implementing the duration, intensity or both of the emitted spectra selected from the group consisting of 290-315 nm, 360-400 nm, 470-490 nm, and 600-1400 nm, is independently regulated from the portion of the emitted spectra serving visual perception as disclosed by Haraguchi in order to improve productivity in workplace and sync circadian rhythm with a 24 hour period as taught/suggested by Haraguchi ([0005; 0041-0042;]).
With regards to claim 12, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Haraguchi further disclose(s):
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 290-315 nm [0171].
With regards to claim 13, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri further disclose(s):
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 360-400 nm (see table A1 in [0104]).
With regards to claim 14, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri further disclose(s):
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 470-490 nm(see table A1 in [0104]).
With regards to claim 15, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri further disclose(s):
wherein the at least one wavelength range promoting non- visual physiological processes is 600-1400 nm (see table A1 in [0104]).
With regards to claim 16, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri further disclose(s):
wherein the user interface is selected from the group consisting of a switch, a dial, a keypad and a touchscreen (3340; fig 30; [0147]).
With regards to claim 18, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Haraguchi further disclose
wherein multiple lighting changes are configured to simulate natural spectral changes over the course of a day [0097].
With regards to claim 20, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Haraguchi further disclose
wherein the duration and intensity of the emitted spectra selected from the group consisting of 290-315 nm, 360-400 nm (237; fig 14; [0156]; see [0158] for emission being non-visual), 470-490 nm, and 600-1400 nm, is independently regulated from the portion of the emitted spectra serving visual perception (see [0160-0161] for control of intensity and reference to “first embodiment”; see duration in figs 13a-13d).
With regards to claim 21, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri further disclose(s):
wherein the processor is configured so that emitted spectra do not exceed an intensity level that is higher than a wavelength proportion of the sun [0082].
With regards to claim 22, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri further disclose(s):
wherein the processor is configured so that emitted spectra are dynamically tuned as to achieve specific light spectra according to the time of the day [0082].
With regards to claim 23, Petluri as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Haraguchi further disclose(s):
wherein the non-visual physiological processes are selected from the group consisting of Vitamin D production and mitigation of oxidative stress [0171].
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petluri (US 20210402210 A1) in view of Haraguchi (US 20200329539 A1) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Lotan (US 20200158939 A1).
With regards to claim 17, Petluri disclose(s):
The system of claim 10
Petluri does not disclose
wherein at least one lighting change is configured as a decrease over time of the 470-490 nm wavelength range during evening hours.
Lotan teaches
wherein at least one lighting change is configured as a decrease over time of the 470-490 nm wavelength range during evening hours [005].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Petluri by implementing the at least one lighting change is configured as a decrease over time of the 470-490 nm wavelength range during evening hours as disclosed by Lotan in order to reduce eyestrain as taught/suggested by Lotan ([005]).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petluri (US 20210402210 A1) in view of Van de Ven (US 20160286616 A1).
With regards to claim 24. Haraguchi discloses:
(Currently amended) A system (fig 14) comprising:
a. a plurality of LEDs configured to produce light that includes at least two different wavelength ranges, wherein at least one wavelength range assists human vision (37, 38; [0124]) and at least one wavelength range promotes non-visual physiological processes (237; fig 14; [0156]; see [0158] for emission being non-visual);
b. a processor (61; [0069]) configured to generate at least one control signal to control power delivered to one or more of the plurality of LEDs (37, 38, 237), the processor further configured to change the at least one control signal over time so as to produce from the device at least one lighting change (figs 13a-13e; [0069, 0095-0096]); and
c. a user interface (12; [0059-0061]) adapted to receive a user input to control operation of the processor;
Haraguchi further disclose:
wherein the plurality of LEDs and the processor are contained in a bulb that can be used in a conventional light
Haraguchi does not disclose:
wherein the plurality of LEDs and the processor are contained in a bulb that can be used in a conventional light bulb housing.
Van de Ven teaches:
wherein the plurality of LEDs and the processor are contained in a bulb that can be used in a conventional light bulb housing (figs 16-17; [0156]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Haraguchi by implementing the plurality of LEDs and the processor are contained in a bulb that can be used in a conventional light bulb housing as disclosed by Van de Ven in order to retrofit current housing wiring as taught/suggested by Van de Ven ([0156]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENAN LUQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1044. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached on 571-272-2078. 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. 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). 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.
/RENAN LUQUE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896