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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 11/17/2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 rejection of claims 1-10 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 11/17/2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 3 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 11/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1,2, and 10 under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jou et al (US20210353137A1); hereinafter Jou.
The applicant also argues that the prior art reference of Kawarai does not teach the timer in sane way as is claimed in the present invention. However, in paragraph [0240], Kawarai teaches “the timer is set at a time period for lighting LED for the treatment, according to the irradiation conditions (especially, dose conditions and illuminance conditions, or irradiation time conditions)”. Therefore, Kawarai does teach that the timer calculates a time value and then based on that calculated value, sets a time period for irradiation.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,7,10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuhan et al (CN 104307105A); hereinafter Wuhan (cited previously) in view of Jou et al (US20210353137A1); hereinafter Jou.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Wuhan teaches an ultraviolet therapy apparatus, comprising:
an LED light source configured to emit light including ultraviolet light (UV semiconductor LED chip (11) that emits UV light);
a controller configured to control lighting of the LED light source (temperature controller (6) controls the input current of a semiconductor cooling chip (9) on the basis of the temperature data); and
a measurement unit configured to detect change in a temperature of the LED light source from a reference temperature (temperature sensing probe (10) detects an increase in the temperature of a UV semiconductor LED),
the controller including:
a calculator configured to calculate a modifying value for modifying an irradiation dose of the ultraviolet light on the basis of change in a degree of effect on a human body caused by change in spectral spectrum of the light due to change in the temperature detected by the measurement unit (temperature of the UV semiconductor LED chip (11) is lowered to within an appropriate range and the wavelength generated by the UV semiconductor LED chip (11) is restricted to within a prescribed range - in order for the controller to be aware of the difference between the current temperature and what is appropriate, a calculation must be done), and
a lighting controller configured to control an irradiation time of the UV light emitted by the LED light source on the basis of the modifying value calculated by the calculator to provide a desired ultraviolet radiation dose to an affected area of human skin of a human body in accordance with the change in the temperature of the LED light source detected by the measurement unit (the wavelength generated by the UV semiconductor LED chip (11) is restricted within a prescribed range).
Wuhan fails to teach the apparent irradiance is obtained by modifying an irradiance on human skin of the ultraviolet light in view of an erythema action on the human skin at each wavelength. Jou teaches the apparent irradiance is obtained by modifying an irradiance on human skin of the ultraviolet light in view of erythema action on the human skin at each wavelength ([0005] after using the mathematical formulas provided by ANSI to calculate effective radiance (LB) and effective irradiance (EB), numeric value of the MPE limit of the specific light would be therefore calculated). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this invention to modify Wuhan with Jou because there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so. Jou teaches “there is a lack of a device for helping generic users in the calculation of MPE of any one kind of light” ([0007]).
The electrical connection between the control unit and the storage unit and the subsequent retrieval of information is obvious because it well-known in the art that calculated values are kept in storage and must be retrieved by the controller.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Wuhan and Jou teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this invention to modify Wuhan wherein the measurement unit measures any one of a temperature of an LED substrate of the LED light source (temperature sensing probe (10) detects an increase in the temperature of a UV semiconductor LED), a forward voltage of the LED light source, and characteristics of the ultraviolet light from the LED light source. Wuhan already teaches measuring the temperature of the UV light source, so it would have been an obvious improvement to also measure the temperature of the LED substrate on which the LED light source is mounted.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Wuhan and Jou teaches a method for applying ultraviolet light using the ultraviolet therapy apparatus according to claim 1. Wuhan further teaches the method compromising:
Detecting change in temperature of LED light source from a reference temperature by the measurement unit (temperature sensing probe (10) detects an increase in the temperature of a UV semiconductor LED);
Calculating the modifying value for modifying the irradiation dose of the ultraviolet light, by the calculator on the basis of the change in temperature detected by the measurement unit (temperature of the UV semiconductor LED chip (11) is lowered to within an appropriate range and the wavelength generated by the UV semiconductor LED chip (11) is restricted to within a prescribed range - in order for the controller to be aware of the difference between the current temperature and what is appropriate, a calculation must be done); and
Controlling the LED light source to emit on the basis of the modifying value by the lighting controller (the wavelength generated by the UV semiconductor LED chip (11) is restricted within a prescribed range).
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuhan and Jou in view of Kawarai et al (US 20210275826 A1); hereinafter Kawarai (cited previously).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Wuhan and Jou teaches the UV therapy apparatus according to claim 1. Wuhan fails to teach specifically calculating an inputted current and a temperature adjustment. Kawarai teaches another modifying value, any one of the inputted current for the LED light source ([0240] setting an LED current…according to the irradiation conditions), and a temperature adjustment amount for the LED light source ([0241] predefined temperature).
And wherein the lighting controller is further configured to control any one of an inputted current for the LED light source and a temperature adjustment amount for the LED light source on the basis of another modifying value calculated by the calculator ([0237] irradiation conditions – the controller changes the parameters based on the irradiation conditions calculated).
It would have been obvious to modify Wuhan with Kawarai because there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so. Kawarai teaches that by including a timer, strict control of the irradiation dose can be achieved.
Regarding claim 9, Wuhan teaches the UV therapy apparatus according to claim 1. Wuhan teaches the measurement unit detects the change in temperature of the LED light source before the LED light source is turned on by the lighting controller (temperature sensing probe (10) detects an increase in the temperature of a UV semiconductor LED). Wuhan fails to teach calculating and irradiation time. Kawarai teaches the calculator calculates an irradiation time of the ultraviolet light as the modifying value before the LED light source is turned on by the lighting controller ([0156] controller comprises a timer), and
wherein the control unit has a display controller configured to display the light irradiation time calculated by the calculator on a display unit before the LED light source is turned on by the lighting controller ([0156] controller comprises a timer… strict control of the irradiation dose can be achieved). It would have been obvious to modify Wuhan with Kawarai because there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so. Kawarai teaches that by including a timer, strict control of the irradiation dose can be achieved.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 and 4 are 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dhrasti SNEHAL Dalal whose telephone number is (571)272-0780. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 am - 6:00 pm, Alternate Friday off, 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Carl Layno can be reached at (571) 272-4949. 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.
/D.S.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/CARL H LAYNO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796