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 .
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 control circuit (claims 1 and 10) 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 § 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 1-10 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.
With regards to claim 1, the claim is indefinite because of the recitation of “blue light emitting chips with same color temperature”. Color temperature is used to describe the appearance of white light and blue LED chips are monochromatic light sources that emit light at a specific wavelength , therefore the claim is ambiguous. Does the resulting light from the blue chip + fluorescent colloid have the color temperature? Appropriate correction is required.
Furthermore, claim 1 states “at least two blue light chipsets with different color temperatures arranged on the substrate” ..” and each of the blue light chipsets comprises a plurality of blue light emitting chips with same color temperature”. Are there different color temperatures or are the color temperatures the same? Appropriate correction is required.
With regards to claim 10, the claim is indefinite because of the recitation of “blue light emitting chips with same color temperature”. Color temperature is used to describe the appearance of white light and blue LED chips are monochromatic light sources that emit light at a specific wavelength , therefore the claim is ambiguous. Does the resulting light from the blue chip + fluorescent colloid have the color temperature? Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 states: “at least two blue light chipsets with different color temperatures arranged on the substrate” ..” and each of the blue light chipsets comprises a plurality of blue light emitting chips with same color temperature”. Are there different color temperatures or are the color temperatures the same? Appropriate correction is required.
Furthermore, the limitation of claim 10 including : “dispensing in the enclosure to form a fluorescent colloid” is unclear. The “fluorescent colloid lacks antecedent basis since there is no structural clarity for the material being dispensed. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaka (JP 2009231027 A) in view of Dai (US Pub no. 2012/0098458 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takenaka et al discloses an LED light emitting chipset (41)and at least two blue light chipsets(31Y, 31G) with different color temperatures arranged on the substrate(23) fig. 3 (para 2 pp. 18; pp 19, para 3), a fluorescent colloid(yellow phosphor) (para 2 ,pp. 18) and an enclosure(28) fig. 6/fig. 7 (pp.16 , para 3); wherein the LED light emitting chipset (41)comprises a plurality of LED light emitting chips(42) (pp. 21 ,para 3), and each of the blue light chipsets (31Y,31G)comprises a plurality of blue light emitting chips (32,34)with same color temperature(pp 25, para 2 ; pp30, para 2); each of the blue light chipsets(31Y,31G) forms a color temperature light emitting area (A1/A2)(fig. 3-fig. 7), and different color temperature light emitting areas (A1/A2)are separated by the enclosure(28) fig. 6 fig. 7(pp. 16, para 4 ; pp.17, para 1;para 2 ,pp. 18; pp 19, para 3);
Takenaka et al teaches a control circuit (7) built in a pendant base on the ceiling (1) (pp. 13, para 4 & 5) for controlling light emission of the corresponding color temperature light emitting area(A1,A2) fig. 4 (pp. 22, para 2 and pp.23, and the fluorescent colloid(phosphor) is arranged in the enclosure(28)(para 2 pp. 18; pp 19, para 3). Furthermore, Takenaka et al teaches the “human centric device” functionality because the independent control of the color regions necessarily result in the tuning of color temperature (pp 29, para 2; pp, 30 para 2, pp. 23 para 3). Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure the claimed functions are presumed to be inherent -In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977))).
Takenaka et al fails to teach the substrate is provide with a control circuit .
.
However, Dai et al discloses a control circuit (control module C )for controlling light emission on a substrate(10) [0055]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Takenaka et al with the a control module on the substrate to control the color temperature as taught by Dai et al in order to obtain direct electrical connection to an AC power source (such as commercial AC power socket) as a power supply source[0007].
Regarding claim 2, Takenaka et al discloses wherein the number of the blue light chipsets (31Y,31G)is two, and the LED light emitting chipset (41-red)is arranged in the color temperature light emitting area with a relatively high color temperature(pp 30 para 2).
Regarding claim 3, Takenaka et al discloses wherein the LED light emitting chipset (41)forms a light emitting area independently(fig. 3-fig.7).
Regarding claim 4, Takenaka et al discloses wherein the two color temperature light emitting areas are spaced apart on the substrate(23) (color temperature regions designated by 31G and 31Y are spaced apart by partition 28) fig. 6/fig. 7.
Regarding claim 5, Takenaka et al discloses wherein the color
temperature light emitting areas( A1 and A2) are symmetrically distributed on the substrate(23) fig. (31G is symmetrically distributed to 31Y).
Regarding claim 6, Takenaka et al discloses wherein a light emitting area (D) formed by the LED light emitting chipset (41)is located in a middle of the substrate(23) fig. 3/fig. 4, and the different color temperature light emitting areas(A2/A1) are distributed on both sides of the light emitting area (D)formed by the LED light emitting chipset(41) fig. 3/fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Takenaka et al discloses wherein the different color temperature light emitting areas (A1/A2)are symmetrically distributed with respect to the light emitting areas(D) formed by the LED light emitting chip set(41) fig. 3/ fig. 4 (region D is adjacent to two LED’s of A2 and two LED’s of A1) .
Regarding claim 8, Takenaka et al A method for manufacturing an LED human centric lighting device, comprising: arranging an LED light emitting chipset(41) and at least two blue light chipsets (31Y, 31G) with different color temperatures on a substrate(23) (para 2, pp 16) (para 2 pp. 18; pp 19, para 3), wherein the LED light emitting chipset (41)comprises a plurality of LED light emitting chips(42) (pp. 21 ,para 3), each of the blue light chipsets (31Y, 31G) comprises a plurality of blue light
emitting chips (32 & 34)with same color temperature and forms a color temperature light emitting area(A1 ,A2) (pp17 para 2; pp 25, para 2 ; pp30, para 2), forming an enclosure(28) around each of the color temperature light emitting areas(A1 ,A2) fig. 3-fig. 7 (pp.16 , para 3); dispensing in the enclosure(28) to form a fluorescent colloid(phosphor) (para 2 ,pp. 18)obtaining the LED human centric lighting device ( Takenaka et al teaches the “human centric device” functionality because the independent control of the color regions necessarily result in the tuning of color temperature (pp 29, para 2; pp, 30 para 2, pp. 23 para 3). Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure the claimed functions are presumed to be inherent -In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1254, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977)))).
Takenaka et al further teaches a control circuit (7) built in a pendant base on the ceiling (1) (pp. 13, para 4 & 5) for controlling light emission of the corresponding color temperature light emitting area(A1,A2) (pp. 17, para 2; pp. 22, para 2 and pp.23 para 3)but fails to teach the substrate is provided with a control circuit .
However, Dai et al discloses a control circuit (control module C )for controlling light emission on a substrate(10) [0055]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Takenaka et al with the a control module on the substrate to control the color temperature as taught by Dai et al in order to obtain direct electrical connection to an AC power source (such as commercial AC power socket) as a power supply source[0007].
Regarding claim 9, Takenaka et al discloses wherein when the number of the blue light chipset(31Y,31G) is two, dispensing in the enclosure(28) to form the fluorescent colloid (phosphor)comprises: dispensing in the enclosure (28)around each of the color temperature light emitting areas(A1,A2) respectively to form the fluorescent colloid(phosphor) (pp. 17, para 2; para 2 pp. 18; pp 19, para 3).
Regarding claim 10, Takenaka et al discloses wherein when the number of the blue light chipset is two, dispensing glue(33) in the enclosure(28) to form the fluorescent colloid (phosphor)comprises: dispensing in the enclosure(28) around the color temperature light emitting area (A1 or A2))with a relatively low color temperature to form the fluorescent colloid(phosphor); dispensing on a whole luminous surface of the substrate(23) to form the fluorescent colloid(phosphor) (pp 17 para 2; pp. 19, para 3; pp. 30 para 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LATANYA N CRAWFORD EASON whose telephone number is (571)270-3208. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM-4:30 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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/LATANYA N CRAWFORD EASON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813