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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
1) The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
2) The disclosure is objected to because of the following: In the Background of the Invention section, reference is made to claim 1. However, the scope of the claims can change during examination, therefore reference to claim 1 should be remove.
Appropriate correction is required.
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: Geometric center C and divergence angle θ1.
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.
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.
Claims 2-9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
1) Claim 15 recites the limitation “a partial region of a radiation exit surface” in line 7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim already discloses a radiation exit surface in line 2 of the claim, making it confusing if this is the same or different elements. In order to overcome this rejection, line 7 should be amended to recite: “a partial region of the radiation exit surface”
2) Claim 15 recites the limitation “the radiation emitted by the respective emission region” in line 8 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim only discloses that the emission regions generate radiation, but does not disclose that they emit radiation. In order to overcome this rejection, line 4 should be amended to recite: “an active region provided for generating and emitting radiation”.
3) Claim 15 recites the limitation “the partial regions each run parallel” in line 13 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In order to overcome this rejection, line 13 should be amended to recite: “the partial regions of the radiation exit surface each run parallel”.
The remainder of the claims are rejected for their dependence on claim 15. For the purpose of examination, the limitations as presented have been searched and considered.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant’s attention is drawn to the references cited on form PTO-892 in the previous office action, which lists other references with similar features as the invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 15 filed on 4/20/26 have been considered but they are moot because of the new grounds of rejection.
Contact Info
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. A. GOLUB-MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8602. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MinSun Harvey can be reached on (571) 272-1835. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned 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. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/M. A. Golub-Miller/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights