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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/19/26 has been entered.
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 8 and 11 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.
For claim 8, the recitation “wherein an LED channel that emits light having a highest color temperature” on line 10 is indefinite because it is not clear if “an LED channel” in the above phrase is the same as the “the first LED channel” (see amended claim 3, lines 13-17). Similarly, the recitation “wherein an LED channel that emits light having a lowest color temperature” on line 12-13 is indefinite because it is not clear if “an LED channel” in the above phrase is the same as the “the third LED channel” (see amended claim 3, lines 13-17). Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
For claim 11, the recitation “an LED channel emitting light having a highest color temperature” on line 12 is indefinite because it is not clear if “an LED channel” in the above phrase is the same as the “the first LED channel” (see amended claim 3, lines 13-17). Clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Note that, for claim 13, the limitations “wherein the first and second LED channels emit white light and the third LED channel emits amber-based or red-based light” recited in claim 13 fails to further limit the LED lighting system in claim 3 because it already recited in amended claim 3 ((see amended claim 3, lines 13-17). Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 19 is rejected for being dependent claim on claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melanson (USP 7,288,902) in view of Jungwirth et al. (USP 2007/00405,12).
For claim 10, Figure 4 of Melanson teaches an LED lighting system capable of performing a dimming function for adjusting brightness of output light to decrease, comprising: an LED light source (404) comprising at least 2 LED channels (406, 408) that are respectively configured to emit light of different color temperatures; and an electric circuit (414, 416, 418) configured to electrically drive the at least 2 LED channels, wherein the electric circuit is configured to drive the at least 2 LED channels so that brightness and color temperature of the output light obtained by the LED light source (404) decrease together in conjunction with each other during dimming in which the brightness of the output light decreases, wherein the electric circuit (414, 416, 418) is configured to implement a timer function (timer in 414, Col. 5, lines 55-65), and wherein when the timer function (time 414) is activated, the electric circuit (414, 416, 418) is configured to control an LED channel having a lowest color temperature such that emitted light is automatically dimmed for a predetermined time and then turned off (Col. 5, line 1 to Col. 6, line 60), or to control the LED channel having the lowest color temperature and an LED channel having a next lowest color temperature such that mixed light is automatically dimmed as the color temperature decreases for a predetermined time and then turned off (Col. 5, line 1 to Col. 6, line 60). Figure 4 of Melanson further also teaches “light source 404 can include additional light sources” (Col. 5, lines 15-36). Figure 4 of Melanson does not explicitly show the light source comprising at least 3 LED channels. However, Figures 1-3 of Jungwirth et al. teaches an LED lighting system wherein the light source comprising at least 3 or more LED channels (20, 30, 40). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art at the time before the invention was effectively filed to modify the light source in Figure 4 of Melanson so that it comprising at least 3 LED channels, as taught in Jungwirth et al., for the purpose of achieving a desired intensity levels of the light source in response to dimming and the desired color temperatures of the light source in response to dimming.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 9, 12, 14, 16-18, 20-22 are allowed.
Claims 8, 11, 13, and 19, which depend on allowable claim 3, would also be allowable if amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and/or 35 U.S.C. 112 (d) set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directly to Examiner Long Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-1753. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Regis Betsch, can be reached at (571) 270-8101. The fax number for this group is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
/Long Nguyen/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2842