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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “fan” in Claims 9-11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-6, 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the Applicant provided prior art Korean Patent 20180058987 to Yoon.
In Reference to Claim 1
Yoon discloses an LED curing apparatus comprising: at least one LED radiation source (Fig. 1, 24) mounted on an LED mount; a housing (Fig. 1, 10) comprising at least one air inlet (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner); at least one finned heat sink (Fig. 1, 26); and at least one air passage (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) through the housing from the or each air inlet through the or each finned heat sink to at least one air outlet (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner); wherein the housing comprises an inlet cavity (Fig. 1, the Office considers that a portion of the air passage is the inlet cavity) below the or each finned heat sink and an outlet cavity (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) above the or each finned heat sink to maintain a higher air pressure below the or each finned heat sink (As showed in Fig. 1, air in the lower portion is pressurized by the fan) and a lower air pressure (As showed in Fig. 1, the opening at the outlet has a larger space, therefore, the pressure is lower) above the or each finned heat sink.
In Reference to Claim 2
Yoon discloses a source of air (As showed in Fig. 1, air is supplied from outside of the housing) and wherein the air pressure in the inlet cavity below the or each finned heat sink is higher sink (As showed in Fig. 1, air in the lower portion is pressurized by the fan) than the air pressure in the outlet cavity (As showed in Fig. 1, the opening at the outlet has a larger space, therefore, the pressure is lower) above the or each finned heat sink to cause suction of air along the or each air passage through the housing from the or each inlet to the or each air outlet through the or each finned heat sink.
In Reference to Claim 3
Yoon discloses the air pressure decreases from the at least one air inlet to the inlet cavity and decreases (Yoon discloses the device is to provide air circulation, naturally, the pressure in the air passage is lower than the environment in order to take air from outside) further from the inlet cavity to the outlet cavity and decreases further again from the outlet cavity to the or each air outlet.
In Reference to Claim 4
Yoon discloses a plurality of LEDs in a linear array. (Fig. 1 shows LEDs are in a line)
In Reference to Claim 5
Yoon discloses the or each air passage comprises at least one restriction (Fig. 4, annotated by the examiner) below the or each finned heat sink.
In Reference to Claim 6
Yoon discloses the or each air passage comprises at least one restriction (Fig. 4, annotated by the examiner) below the or each finned heat sink (Fig. 3, 26) wherein the restriction below the or each finned heat sink reduces (As showed in Fig. 4) the cross sectional area of the air flow path from the inlet cavity below the or each finned heat sink to the or each finned heat sink.
In Reference to Claim 9
Yoon discloses at least one source of air and at least one fan (Fig. 1, 32) to move air into the or each air passage.
In Reference to Claim 10
Yoon discloses at least one source of air and at least one fan (Fig. 1, 32) to pull air into the or each air passage.
In Reference to Claim 11
Yoon discloses at least one source of air and at least one fan (Fig. 1, 34 or 32) positioned at a distance from the LED curing apparatus.
In Reference to Claim 12
Yoon discloses at least one fan (Fig. 1, 32) and ducting (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) wherein the or each fan is connected to the housing by the ducting.
In Reference to Claim 13
Yoon discloses at least one air outlet (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) is at a first end of the apparatus and the opposing second end of the apparatus is sealed (As showed in Fig. 1, the bottom end is sealed).
In Reference to Claim 14
Yoon discloses the or each air inlet is along substantially the entire length (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) of the apparatus.
In Reference to Claim 15
Yoon discloses the outlet cavity has a greater cross-sectional area (Fig. 1, annotated by the examiner) than the cross sectional area of the adjacent finned heat sink.
PNG
media_image1.png
420
548
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
433
574
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
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 7, 8, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon.
In Reference to Claims 7 and 8
Yoon discloses the restriction having a reduction in the cross sectional area.
Yoon does not teach the ratio of the area reduction.
According to MPEP, the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. A person with ordinary skill in the art will make design decision based on the performance requirement.
In Reference to Claims 18-19
Yoon teaches the LED curing device.
Yoon does not teach the detail of the pressure difference in the passage,
According to MPEP, the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. A person with ordinary skill in the art will make design decision based on the performance requirement.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon in view of US Patent 2008/0144319 to Chang.
In Reference to Claim 17
Yoon discloses the heat sink.
Yoon does not teach the detail of the heat sink.
Chang discloses a plurality of heat pipes or metal rods (Fig. 1, 42, the rod is made by aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, to incorporate teachings from Chang into the design of Yoon. Doing so, would result in the heat sink design of Chang being used as the heat sink of Yoon. Both inventions of Yoon and Chang are for cooling of the LED cooling system, Chang teaches a method of high efficiency between the LED and the heat sink.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMING WAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1410. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur: 8 am to 6 PM.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at 5712705614. 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.
DEMING . WAN
Examiner
Art Unit 3748
/DEMING WAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762 9/26/25