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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 01/14/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terashima et al. (US Pub: 2010/0201281 A1~ hereinafter “Terashima”).
Regarding claim 1, Terashima discloses a method for operating a discharge lamp (90; [0048]; see fig. 3) by adapting a current signal by performing the following steps: (a) defining and/or providing a distribution function ([0016]; [0012]) for gathering several time span values that define several different time spans (see figs. 5c-d, 8; Tx1 toTx12; [0125]-[0127]).
Terashima does not expressly disclose determining the several time span values depending on the distribution function by one or more random numbers, and (c) commutating the current signal at every instant of time according to an expiry of each of the several time spans.
Terashima in a second embodiment discloses (in at least figs. 11-13; [0128]-[0141]) (b) determining the several time span values (T1-T6) depending on the distribution function ([0128]-[0131]) by one or more random numbers ([0135]-[0139]), and (c) commutating the current signal at every instant of time according to an expiry of each of the several time spans ([0137]-[0141]) for the purpose of providing a discharge lamp, and a projector capable of preventing uneven segregation of electrode materials by suppressing formation of a steady convention current inside the discharge lamp and suppressing deformation of electrode protrusions ([0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the first embodiment of Terashima with the second embodiment for the purpose of providing a discharge lamp, and a projector capable of preventing uneven segregation of electrode materials by suppressing formation of a steady convention current inside the discharge lamp and suppressing deformation of electrode protrusions ([0006]).
Regarding claim 2, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the several time spans are arranged directly adjacent.
Regarding claim 3, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) several distribution functions are used and for each time span value one of those distribution functions is selected according to a further random number.
Regarding claim 4, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) step a), step b) and/or step c) are performed repeatedly.
Regarding claim 5, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 3, 5c-d, 8 and 1-13 and corresponding paragraphs) the distribution function is defined depending on one or more discharge lamp parameters, in particular a lamp voltage, a power level of the discharge lamp, a position and orientation of the discharge lamp, a current flow through the discharge lamp, an abrasion degree of a pair of electrode tips and/or the voltage ratio of time spans of opposite polarity.
Regarding claim 6, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the distribution function is defined dynamically based on a measured quantity or several measured quantities that describe the discharge lamp parameter and/or the parameter of the pair of electrodes of the discharge lamp.
Regarding claim 7, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the defining of the distribution function is based on a dynamical behavior of an average lamp voltage, a dynamic behavior of the lamp voltage during each time span and/or a dynamical behavior of the current flow through the discharge lamp.
Regarding claim 8, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) several distribution functions are given and the distribution function for determining the time span values is selected based on a threshold value concerning the discharge lamp voltage.
Regarding claim 9, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) at least two different probability functions are given and the distribution function for determining the time span values is a superposition of the least two different probability functions, wherein the superposition is depending on the lamp voltage.
Regarding claim 10, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the distribution function is defined by a characteristic diagram of the discharge lamp voltage, in particular the distribution function is depending on a threshold value of the discharge lamp voltage.
Regarding claim 11, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) for different types of discharge lamps and/or for different groups of discharge lamps a separate distribution function is defined.
Regarding claim 12, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the distribution function contains a boundary condition.
Regarding claim 13, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) a probability value with regard to a corresponding predetermined time span value is defined by the boundary condition or several probability values with regard to corresponding predetermined several time span values are defined by the boundary condition, wherein in particular the probabilities of the several time span values are defined by a ratio to each other.
Regarding claim 14, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) a maximum and a minimum value is defined by the boundary condition.
Regarding claim 15, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the distribution function is superposed with a predetermined function, or one of several predetermined functions, wherein at least one of the several predetermined functions is selected by the at least one random number in order to determine the time span values.
Regarding claim 16, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) distribution function is defined based on a lifetime of the discharge lamp.
Regarding claim 17, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the current signal is a wave-shaped signal, a square-wave signal or a mixture of wave-shaped and square-waved signal.
Regarding claim 18, Terashima discloses (in at least figs. 5c-d, 8 and 1-13) the distribution function is defined as a uniform distribution, a normal distribution, an exponential distribution, a power law distribution and/or an overlaid normal distribution.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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 and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875