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 Arguments: Abstract
Applicant has amended the abstract to comply with MPEP § 608.01(b), accordingly the objection to the abstract is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
Claims 12, 18 and 20 were amended to remove “such as” clauses which rendered the claims indefinite. Previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) to claims 12, 18 and 20 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 12-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et. al. (US Pub 20200052466), hereinafter referred to as Chen, in view of Fiederling (US Pub. 20160290856), hereinafter referred to as Fiederling.
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches an optical emitter arrangement, comprising: a housing (Chen, 951, fig 9); an electrical interconnection member an electrical interconnection member (Chen, 991, fig. 9, para. 57); an optical emitter device (Chen, 900, fig. 9, para. 51) mounted on the electrical interconnection member (Chen, Fig. 9), the electrical interconnection member being attached to the housing such that the optical emitter device is located within the housing (Chen, Fig 9); an optical system (Chen, 952, Fig. 9, para. 55) comprising: an optical element (Chen, 953, Fig. 9, para. 51) for transmitting light emitted by the optical emitter device (Chen, para. 51), the optical system being attached to the housing (Chen, Fig. 9) so that the optical element can receive light (Chen, 909, Fig. 9) emitted by the optical emitter device and transmit the received light (Chen, Fig. 9, 958) out of the housing wherein the optical system includes an optical substrate (Chen, Fig. 9, 952), wherein the optical substrate is attached to the housing (Chen, Fig. 9), and a sensed element (Chen, 953, Fig. 9) wherein the sensed element is defined on the optical substrate (Chen, 953, 952 Fig. 9, para. 51), wherein the optical element comprises an optical diffuser (Chen, para. 51).
Chen does not teach a sensed element comprising a floating electrode; and a proximity sensor mounted on the electrical interconnection member for sensing a proximity of the sensed element, wherein the proximity sensor comprises a sensing electrode that is separated from the floating electrode by an electrical insulator and/or a dielectric material so as to define a capacitance therebetween, wherein the optical element comprises an optical diffuser defined on the floating electrode, and wherein the floating electrode defines an aperture aligned with the optical emitter device for transmitting the light emitted by the optical emitter device through the optical element and out of the housing.
However, Fiederling teaches a device for monitoring a light conversion device which comprises a floating electrode (Fiederling, 131, Fig. 3 and 7, para. 165-166, Figure 3 lacks terminals 135A/135B shown in Figure 2, therefore in the embodiment of Figures 3 and 7, 131 is a floating electrode) and a proximity sensor for sensing a proximity of the sensed element (Fiederling 132, Fig 7, I Fiederling this is mounted on the light conversion element), wherein the proximity sensor comprises a sensing electrode that is separated from the floating electrode by an electrical insulator and/or a dielectric material (Fiederling, 120, Fig. 7, para. 165) so as to define a capacitance therebetween, wherein the optical element (Fiederling, 120, Fig. 4, para. 133) is defined on the floating electrode, and wherein the floating electrode defines an aperture aligned with the optical emitter device for transmitting the light emitted by the optical emitter device through the optical element and out of the housing (Fiederling, 131, Fig. 4, 135. Fig. 5, paras. 146-148).
Additionally while Fiederling is silent as to the proximity sensor’s placement in regards to an electrical interconnection member, its placement on the optical element, when combined with the optical emitter arrangement of Chen, places it on the electrical interconnection member.
Therefore it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the optical emitter arrangement of Chen with the device of Fiederling in order to provide a fail-safe system (Fiederling, para. 3).
Regarding claim 2, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, wherein the proximity sensor (Chen, Fig. 9, 961) is configured to generate a signal which is representative of a non-contact interaction between the proximity sensor (Chen, Fig. 9, 961) and the sensed element (Chen para. 42, the optical component may be uncoated or have a thin film coating designed to provide a desired reflection coefficient,) and the optical emitter arrangement further comprises a controller (Chen, Fig. 9, 996) for controlling the optical emitter device in response to the signal generated by the proximity sensor (Chen, Fig. 9, 961, para. 55).
Regarding claim 3, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 2, wherein the controller (Chen, Fig. 9, 996) is configured to shut off the optical emitter device (Chen, Fig. 9,900), for example by switching off a supply of electrical power and/or a supply of electrical current to the optical emitter device (Chen, Fig. 9, 900), in response to the signal generated by the proximity sensor (Chen, Fig. 9,961, para. 55).
Regarding claim 4, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 2, wherein the controller (Chen, Fig 9, 996) is mounted on the electrical interconnection member (Chen, Fig. 9, 991 para. 57).
Regarding claim 6, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1 wherein the optical element (Chen, Fig. 9, 953), is monolithically integrated with, or defined by a surface of, the optical substrate (Chen, Fig 9, 952) or the optical element (Chen, Fig. 9, 953) is defined in, or formed from, a material which is formed, or deposited, on the optical substrate (Chen, para. 51).
Regarding claim 7, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, wherein the sensed element (Chen, para 52, the optical component may be uncoated or have a thin film coating designed to provide a desired reflection coefficient) is defined in, or formed from, a material which is formed, or deposited, on the optical substrate.
Regarding claim 12, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, wherein the proximity sensor (Chem Fig. 9, 961) comprises a photodetector (Chen, para. 52) and the sensed element is at least partially reflective (Chen, para. 52) and wherein the optical emitter device, the photodetector and the sensed element are arranged so that a portion of the light emitted by the optical emitter device is reflected from the sensed element and detected by the photodetector (Chen, Fig. 9, 909, 958, 965).
Regarding claim 13, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 12, wherein the floating electrode comprises, or is formed of, at least partially reflective material (Chen, para. 52, states that the sensed element is at least partially reflective), wherein one or more apertures are defined in the at least partially reflective material (Chen, Fig 9, 953 has apertures aligned with the optical emitter device, and Fiederling, para. 157 shows that the wires may be any shape) and wherein the one or more apertures are aligned with the optical emitter device.
Regarding claim 14, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 12, wherein the floating electrode defines one or more non-contiguous areas of at least partially reflective material (Chen, Fig 9, 952 953). The sensed element is the film on (952, see para. 52), or the surface of (952). The noncontiguous area are brought about by the functioning structure (953). Additionally the floating electrode wires (Fiederling 135, Fig. 4) may be arranged in a grid pattern as shown, or in any desired shape (Fiederling, para. 157).
Regarding claim 15, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 14, wherein the one or more non-contiguous areas of the at least partially reflective material are aligned with the optical emitter device. Chen, Fig 9, shows the functioning structure (953) above the emitter (900) with several apertures present therein. Fig. 9 also shows light (909) partially reflecting from (965) and partially transmitting through (958) the optical structure (952).
Regarding claim 17, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, wherein the floating electrode comprises one or more capacitance sensing cells (Fiederling, para. 165, 172).
Regarding claim 18, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, wherein the optical emitter device comprises a light emitting diode (LED) or a laser diode (Chen, para. 8).
Regarding claim 19, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, wherein at least one of: the optical element is configured to spatially modulate the light emitted by the optical emitter device; the optical element is configured to spatially modulate the amplitude and/or phase of the light emitted by the optical emitter device; the optical element is refractive; the optical element comprises a lens; the optical element comprises a plurality of lenses; the optical element comprises a microlens array; the optical element is diffractive; and the optical element comprises a diffraction grating (Chen: par 12).
Regarding claim 20, modified Chen teaches a projector or an illuminator (Chen para. 8-10) such as a flood illuminator, comprising the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1.
Claims 10-11are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morgan et. al. (US Pub. 20060022214).
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the sensed element comprises, or is formed from, a magnetic material and the proximity sensor comprises a magnetic field sensor.
However, Morgan teaches wherein the sensed element comprises, or is formed from, a magnetic material (Morgan, para. 397) and the proximity sensor comprises a magnetic field sensor (Morgan, para. 397)
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to have combined the teachings of Chen with the magnetic switch of Morgan to create the VCSEL device with a magnetic sensor to protect people from being exposed to unsafe illumination by using the magnetic material’s proximity to the sensor to complete the power circuit (Morgan, para. 397) thereby causing it to deactivate if the magnetic material is no longer in proximity.
Regarding claim 11, modified Chen teaches the optical emitter arrangement of claim 10 wherein the proximity sensor comprises a Hall effect sensor (Morgan, para. 397).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Fiederling fails to fill the gap in Chen regarding the capacitive sensing architecture because it is directed to capacitance between two layers of the sensor instead of a floating electrode. However, in the embodiment of Figures 3 and 7, 131 is a floating electrode, because it lacks electrical connection to another component. Applicant also argues that Fiederling fails to demonstrate the optical diffuser, however Chen discloses an optical diffuser (Chen, para. 51) which is an optical element which can be combined with the capacitive sensor and floating electrode of Fiederling to create the claimed invention. Additionally the applicant claims that the floating electrode must define the aperture, and Fiederling states in para. 157 that the floating electrode may be of any desired shape.
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 KIERAN M CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-9654. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-4:3.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at 5712703042. 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.
/KIERAN M. CUNNINGHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights