DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This Office Action is in response to Amendments/Remarks filed on April 20, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP-2010054643-A to Matsumoto (“Matsumoto”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0167047 A1 to Lee (“Lee”). As to claim 1, Matsumoto discloses a light emitting device (10) comprising: a main light emitting module (1 next to 2) comprising a main light emitting substrate (support) oriented in a main direction and configured to generate light; a tilting module (bent) comprising a tilting frame (at 1) including a first frame part (left 1) and a second frame part (right 1) forming an angle with each other, the tilting frame (at 1) disposed on one side of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2); a first auxiliary light emitting module (on left 1) comprising a first auxiliary light emitting substrate (support) disposed on the first frame part (left 1) and oriented in a first auxiliary direction different from the main direction, and at least one first auxiliary light emitting element (LED) disposed on the first auxiliary light emitting substrate (support) and configured to generate first auxiliary light; and a second auxiliary light emitting module (on right 1) comprising a second auxiliary light emitting substrate (support) disposed on the second frame part (right 1) and oriented in a second auxiliary direction different from the main direction and the first auxiliary direction, and at least one second auxiliary light emitting element (LED) disposed on the second auxiliary light emitting substrate (support) to generate second auxiliary light (See Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Page 1, Page, Page 6). Lee also discloses a display module (110) comprises a substrate (120) and light emitting elements (130) (See Fig. 2, Fig. 3, ¶ 0055, ¶ 0060, ¶ 0068, ¶ 0069). The display module is known to comprise the substrate the light emitting elements to display desired wavelengths. As to claim 2, Matsumoto in view of Lee further discloses wherein one or more main light emitting elements (LED/130) are disposed on the main light emitting substrate (support/120) (See Matsumoto Fig. 1 and Lee Fig. 2). As to claim 3, Matsumoto discloses further comprising an additional main light emitting module (another 1), and wherein a non-emission area (at 3, 31, 32) where no light is generated is formed between the main light emitting module (1 next to 2) and the additional main light emitting module (another 1) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Page 6). As to claim 4, Matsumoto in view of Lee further discloses wherein the one or more main light emitting elements (LED/130) include a plurality of main light emitting structures (130) and a main light emission electrode (135a, 135b), wherein each of the plurality of main light emitting structures (130) includes one or more conductive-type semiconductor layer (132, 134) and an electrode layer (137a, 137b), and wherein the main light emission electrode (135a, 135b) is electrically connected to the electrode layer (137a, 137b) included in each of the plurality of main light emitting structures (130) (See Lee Fig. 2, Fig. 3, ¶ 0068). As to claim 5, Matsumoto in view of Lee further discloses wherein one or more first auxiliary light emitting elements (LED/130) are disposed on the first auxiliary light emitting substrate (support/120) (See Lee Fig. 2). As to claim 6, Matsumoto in view of Lee further discloses wherein the one or more first auxiliary light emitting elements (LED/130) are configured to generate light of a different wavelength from that of one or more main light emitting elements (LED/130) included in the main light emitting module (1 next to 2), or configured to have a different lamination structure from that of the one or more main light emitting elements (LED/130) (See Lee Fig. 2, ¶ 0060) such that desired wavelengths are emitted as desired and application/direction specific. As to claim 8, Matsumoto further discloses wherein the tilting module (bent) further includes a rotation driving unit (3) configured to provide a driving force for rotating the tilting frame (at 1), wherein the rotation driving unit (3) includes a rotation shaft (31, 32) extending in a direction orthogonal to an imaginary line perpendicular to a central portion of the first frame part (left 1) and an imaginary line perpendicular to a central portion of the second frame part (right 1), and the rotation driving unit (3) is configured to rotate the tilting frame (at 1) about the rotation shaft (31, 32) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 3) (Notes: the limitation “rotate” is defined as to go or cause to go in a regular and recurring succession of changes by collinsdictionary.com). As to claim 9, Matsumoto further discloses wherein when viewed from a front side, a width of the tilting module (bent) in a left-right direction is smaller than a width of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2) in the left right direction (See Fig. 1) (Notes: the tilting module can comprise two frame parts and the main light emitting module can comprise three frame parts). As to claim 10, Matsumoto discloses further comprising a controller (2) for controlling at least one of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2), the first auxiliary light emitting module (on left 1), and the second auxiliary light emitting module (on right 1), or controlling the rotation driving unit (3) to rotate the tilting frame (at 1) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Page 6). As to claim 11, Matsumoto further discloses wherein the controller (2) controls the tilting module (bent) so that the tilting frame (at 1) is positioned in a first position state in which a front surface of the first frame part (left 1) and a front surface of the second frame part (right 1) each form an inclination angle with a front surface of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2), a second position state in which one of the front surface of the first frame part (left 1) and the front surface of the second frame part (right 1) is parallel to the front surface of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2), or a third position state in which the other one of the front surface of the first frame part (left 1) and the front surface of the second frame part (right 1) is parallel to the front surface of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2) (See Fig. 1, Page 6). As to claim 12, Matsumoto further discloses wherein in the first position state, the inclination angle between the front surface of the first frame part (left 1) and the front surface of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2) and the inclination angle between the front surface of the second frame part (right 1) and the front surface of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2) are smaller than an angle formed by the front surface of the first frame part (left 1) and the front surface of the second frame part (right 1) (See Fig. 1) (Notes: the parallel surfaces between the front surfaces form a smaller angle than the angle between the front surfaces of the first and second frame parts). As to claim 13, Matsumoto further discloses wherein in the first position state, a connection portion (at 3) of the first frame part (left 1) and the second frame part (right 1) is protruded forward or retracted backward by a predetermined distance from an imaginary reference line extending from the front surface of the main light emitting module (1 next to 2) to the connection portion (at 3) of the first frame part (left 1) and the second frame part (right 1) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of 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 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 DAVID CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12-6.
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, JOSHUA BENITEZ can be reached at (571) 270-1435. 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.
/DAVID CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights