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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group III in the reply filed on April 17, 2026 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 12 and 13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 17, 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “128” on line 2 of page 26 and “210” on line 28 of page 27. 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 412, 414, 416, 440, 442, etc., in figure 4 and
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because “coupled light into” on line 6 is confusing because it is unclear what the applicant is attempting to set forth. How is light “coupled” into an object? A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the description of figures 5a to 5c, 6a to 6e, and 7a to 7e on lines 4-11 of page 24 is inadequate since each of the figures requires a separate description.
On line 2 of page 26, “128” is confusing. Did the applicant mean to recite
--120--?
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Recitations such as “couple light into” on line 8 of claim 1 render the claims indefinite because it is unclear what the applicant is attempting to set forth. How is light “coupled” into an object? Also see lines 3 and 5 of claim 6.
Recitations such as “the at least one barrier body refractive index” on line 4 of claim 3 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Recitations such as “the surface of the surrounding surface” on lines 2-3 of claim 8 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Recitations such as “the at least one barrier body” on line 2 of claim 9 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Recitations such as “a passage barrier” and “an access control system” on line 1 of claim 1 render the claims indefinite because it is unclear if the applicant is referring to the passage barrier and access control system set forth on line 1 of claim 14. Note that the applicant has incorporated all of the limitations of claim 1 into claim 14. Thus, there are two recitations of “a passage barrier” and “an access control system” in claim 14.
Recitations such as “a light source controller” on line 2 of claim 16 render the claims indefinite because it is unclear if the applicant is referring to the light source controller set forth above or is attempting to set forth another light source controller in addition to the one set forth above.
Recitations such as “an operating state” on line 3 of claim 16 render the claims indefinite because it is unclear if the applicant is referring to the operating state set forth above or is attempting to set forth another operating state in addition to the one set forth above.
Recitations such as “the at least one barrier body refractive index” on line 4 of claim 17 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 4, 7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2002-040261.
With respect to claim 1, JP 2002-040261 discloses a barrier body arrangement (labeled below) for a passage barrier of an access control system (note that the barrier body arrangement can be used in a passage barrier of an access control system), comprising:
at least one first substantially optically transparent barrier body 1 having at least one first light coupling surface 5,
at least one second substantially optically transparent barrier body 2 having at least one second light coupling surface 5,
wherein the first barrier body 1 is connected to the second barrier body 2,
at least one light source device 8 configured to couple light into the first light coupling surface 1 and/or the second light coupling surface 2,
wherein at least one substantially optical transparent separation layer 3 is arranged between the first barrier body 1 and the second barrier body 2.
With respect to claim 4, the light source device comprises an optically non-transparent encapsulation 12.
With respect to claim 7, at least one of the barrier bodies 1 comprises at least one light decoupling surface (labeled below). It should be noted that a “light decoupling surface” is considered to be a surface through which light leaves the barrier body 1.
With respect to claim 9, the at least one barrier body 1 is a plate-shaped barrier body as shown in figures 1 and 2.
With respect to claim 10, the at least one light source device 8 is arranged on a narrow side of the first barrier body 1 and/or of the second barrier body 2 as shown in figure 1.
With respect to claim 11, the separation layer 3 is arranged between a first flat side of the first barrier body 1 and a second flat side of the second barrier body 2 as shown in figure 1.
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.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2002-040261 as applied to claims 1, 4, 7 and 9-11 above. JP 2002-040261 is silent concerning the specific refractive indices of the separation layer, the first barrier body and the second barrier body.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to, through an obvious matter of engineering design choice as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, provide the separation layer with a refractive index which is smaller than a refractive index of the first barrier body and a refractive index of the second barrier body (claim 2) and to provide the separation layer with a refractive index which is less than 1.5 (claim 3) to ensure the proper diffusion of light passing through the separation layer.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2002-040261 as applied to claims 1, 4, 7 and 9-11 above, and further in view of Tsai et al. (US 2016/0320550). JP 2002-040261 discloses that the light source device comprises at least one first light source 8 configured to generate light in a light wavelength range, and the light source device comprises at least one second light source 8 configured to generate light in a light wavelength range.
JP 2002-040261 is silent concerning the light wavelength range of the first light source being different form the light wavelength range of the second light source.
However, Tsai et al. discloses a barrier body arrangement comprising a light source device comprising at least one first light source 119 configured to generate light in a first light wavelength range (see the first color on lines 7-8 of paragraph 34), and the light source device comprises at least one second light source 129 configured to generate light in a second light wavelength range (see the second color on line 8 of paragraph 34) different from the first light wavelength range.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide JP 2002-040261 with a first and second colors, as taught by Tsai et al., with a reasonable expectation of success to enable a user to communicate via color, i.e., green for go and red for stop.
With respect to claim 6, JP 2002-040261 discloses that the at least one first light source 8 is arranged in the light source device such that the generated light is coupled only into the at least one first light coupling surface 5, and the at least one second light source 8 is arranged in the light source device such that the generated light is coupled only into the at least one second light coupling surface 5.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2002-040261 as applied to claims 1, 4, 7 and 9-11 above, and further in view of Tsai et al. (US 2016/0320550). JP 2002-040261 discloses a light decoupling surface, but is silent concerning the light decoupling surface being rougher than the sounding surface.
However, Tsai et al. discloses a light decoupling surface comprising a surface 126 (fig. 2) which is rougher than the surface of the surrounding surface of the light decoupling surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide JP 2002-040261 with a light coupling surface, as taught by Tsai et al., with a reasonable expectation of success to enable a user to display a pattern, e.g., words, on the barrier body arrangement.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al. (US 2020/0226864) in view of JP 2002-040261.
OH et al. discloses a passage barrier of an access control system 1 (fig. 1), comprising: at least one base 100 (fig. 3), and at least one barrier body arrangement 210 (fig. 5) movably mounted to the base 1 between an open position and a closed position.
OH et al. discloses that barrier body arrangement comprises at least one light source 230 to illuminate that barrier body arrangement 210, but is silent concerning the specific limitations set forth in claim 1.
However, JP 2002-040261 discloses a barrier body arrangement (labeled below) for a passage barrier of an access control system (note that the barrier body arrangement can be used in a passage barrier of an access control system), comprising:
at least one first substantially optically transparent barrier body 1 having at least one first light coupling surface 5,
at least one second substantially optically transparent barrier body 2 having at least one second light coupling surface 5,
wherein the first barrier body 1 is connected to the second barrier body 2,
at least one light source device 8 configured to couple light into the first light coupling surface 1 and/or the second light coupling surface 2,
wherein at least one substantially optical transparent separation layer 3 is arranged between the first barrier body 1 and the second barrier body 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide OH et al. with a barrier body arrangement, as taught by JP 2002-040261, with a reasonable expectation of success to reduce the overall thickness of the barrier body arrangement.
With respect to claim 15, the passage barrier comprises at least one detection module 400 configured to detect an operating state of the passage barrier, and the passage barrier comprises at least one light source controller 900 configured to control the light source device based on the detected operating state of the passage barrier.
With respect to claim 16, OH et al. discloses a method of operating a passage barrier comprising: controlling, by a light source controller 900, the light source device 230 of the barrier body arrangement based on an operating state of the passage barrier device as set forth in paragraph 97.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2002-040261 as applied to claims 2 and 3 above. JP 2002-040261 is silent concerning the specific refractive indices of the separation layer, the first barrier body and the second barrier body.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to, through an obvious matter of engineering design choice as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, provide at least one of the barrier bodies 1, 2 with a refractive index between 1.5 and 1.9 to ensure that the a user of the barrier body arrangement is able to see the light generated by the barrier body arrangement.
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to, through an obvious matter of engineering design choice as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, provide
PNG
media_image1.png
1642
1136
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY J STRIMBU whose telephone number is (571)272-6836. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 Monday-Friday.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/GREGORY J STRIMBU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights