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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 12/8/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-2 and 9-10 have been amended. Claim 17 has been cancelled. Claims 22-24 have been added. Claims 1-4, 6-16, and 18-24 are still pending in this application, with claims 1 and 9 being independent.
The objection to Claim 17 has been withdrawn in view of the amendment.
The rejection of Claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn in view of the amendment.
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 “diameter of the first concave circular dimple is greater than the diameters of the second” in Claim 22 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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Newly presented Claim 22 recites that the two or more concave circular dimples on the front surface of the lens “comprise a first concave circular dimple and two or more second concave circular dimples, wherein the diameter of the first concave circular dimples is greater than the diameter of the second” in lines 2-4 of the claim (emphasis added). In other words, Claim 22 requires a single first concave circular dimple on the front surface of the lens whose diameter is greater than that of two or more second concave circular dimples on the front surface of the lens.
However, the Specification as originally filed describes features shown in Figs. 3A-3C and states “the backs surface 332 may include a back surface feature 336, generally centered on the back surface 332 corresponding to a dimple that has a diameter, D1, and a depth, d1. The back surface feature may be convex” (see pg. 10, lines 21-23 of the Specification as filed), and also describes in the same paragraph that “the front surface 362 may include a plurality of front surface features 366, and a second front surface feature 368. The front surface features 366, 368 may be concave” (see pg. 10, lines 24-25 of the Specification as filed). The next paragraph then explains that “the back surface 332 includes one circular geometric feature 336 generally centered on the surface, a plurality of similar arcs 340, generally centered on each side … of the back surface 332, and a plurality of relatively smaller arc portions 350, generally positioned at a respective corner … Continuing with this example, the front surface 362 includes one relatively smaller circular geometric feature 368 generally centered on the front surface 362, and a plurality of relatively larger circular geometric features 366, generally centered on each side … of the front surface 362” (see pg. 10, lines 28-33 through pg. 11, lines 1-2 of the Specification as filed). In other words, these two paragraphs describe the back surface 332 of the lens as having a plurality of convex circular or arcuate features 336, 340, and 350, and the front surface 362 as having a plurality of concave circular features 366 and 368, which are shown in Figs. 3A-3C. However, as shown clearly in Fig. 3C, on the front surface 362 of the lens, the single concave front surface feature 368 (i.e. “first concave circular dimple” of Claim 22) has a smaller diameter D3 than the diameters D2 of the two or more concave front surface features 366 (i.e. “two or more second concave circular dimples” of Claim 22), which is opposite to what is claimed in Claim 22.
Therefore, the recitation in Claim 22 that the two or more concave circular dimples on the front surface of the lens include a first concave circular dimple having a diameter that is “greater than” the diameters of the second concave circular dimples is new matter, since it is neither described in the Specification nor shown in the Drawings as originally filed.
For the purpose of examination, the Examiner has assumed Applicant was intending to claim what is shown in Fig. 3C and described on pg. 10, lines 23-33 through pg. 11, lines 1-2 of the Specification as filed, and therefore the Examiner respectfully suggests amending line 3 of Claim 22 to recite --less
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.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the diameter of the first concave circular dimple" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --a
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the diameters of the second" in lines 3-4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, it appears that words intended to follow the term “the second” have been inadvertently omitted. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --concave circular dimples-- to establish proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 6-16, 18, 21, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tomota et al. (JP 2020077551, see previously attached machine translation, hereinafter “Tomota”).
Regarding claim 1, Tomota discloses a lens structure (optical lens 200; see Figs. 1-5C; Abstract; pgs. 2, 4 of machine translation) comprising a lens comprising a lens front surface and a lens back surface (first lens 210 comprises a plurality of lens portions 211 on a back surface thereof, and a plurality of dimples 240 on a front, light emitting surface thereof; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 3, last paragraph through pg. 5, top paragraph, and pg. 5, last paragraph), wherein the lens front surface comprises two or more concave circular dimples (a plurality of dimples 240 which are all concave and circular are provided on the front surface of the lens 210; see Figs. 3A, 3C-4; pg. 5, last paragraph); and a backend comprising a backend back surface and a backend front surface (the lens structure 200 comprises a second lens 220 which defines a backend having a back surface at concave/recess wall surface 222b, and a front surface at wall 223 of protrusion 221; see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; see pg. 4, third paragraph; pg. 5, first through seventh paragraphs; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs), the backend configured to receive a luminous flux from a light source and to redirect the received luminous flux onto the lens, the redirected luminous flux configured to increase a luminous efficacy (light emitted by light source 100 is emitted into the backend 220 through the backend back surface 222b and through recess bottom surface 222a to be refracted and undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend, to redirect the light towards the lens 210; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs), wherein the backend front surface is adjacent to the lens back surface (the backend 220 extends integrally from the back surface of the lens 210 like the various lens portions 211, and therefore an uppermost portion of the backend front surface 223 is directly adjacent to the back surface of the lens at the corner where it meets an innermost of the lens portions 211; see Figs. 3B-5C, especially Figs. 3B-4; pg. 4, second paragraph through pg. 5, seventh paragraph; pg. 6, fourth through fifth paragraphs).
Regarding claim 2, Tomota discloses wherein the backend front surface is contiguous with the lens back surface (the backend 220 is integrally formed with the lens 210, with the protrusion 221 of the backend (and thus the backend front surface 223) protruding towards the light source 100 from the tips of the lens portions 211 on the back surface of the lens 210, thus forming an integral, contiguous surface; see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; pg. 5, first paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs).
Regarding claim 3, Tomota discloses wherein the backend back surface is configured to reflect at least a portion of the received luminous flux onto the lens back surface (light from the light source 100 is emitted to the backend back surface 222b and is refracted to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend 220 (i.e., between the backend front surface 223 which is integral and contiguous with the lens back surface 211, and the backend back surface 222b), to redirect the light towards the lens 210; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs; the Examiner notes that since the protrusion 221 of the backend 220 protrudes from the protrusions 211 of the back surface of the lens 210, and therefore has an outer surface 223 integral and contiguous with the lens back surface to form an extension of the lens back surface, any light undergoing total internal reflection within the backend 220 after entering through backend back surface 222b which is internally reflected off backend front surface 223 back towards surface 222b will be internally reflected again back towards the surface 223 or to other areas of the lens).
Regarding claim 4, Tomota discloses wherein the backend back surface is configured to refract at least a portion of the received luminous flux and, via total internal reflection, is configured to transmit the refracted luminous flux into the lens (light from the light source 100 is emitted to the backend back surface 222b and is refracted to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend 220, to redirect the light towards the lens 210; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs).
Regarding claim 6, Tomota discloses wherein the lens is configured to receive a portion of the luminous flux from the light source directly from the light source (the lens 210 receives light directly from the light source 100 at the protrusions 211 on the lens back surface; see Figs. 5A-5B; see pg. 9, last paragraph through pg. 10, fourth paragraph).
Regarding claim 7, Tomota discloses wherein the lens front surface comprises a plurality of front surface features configured to enhance a characteristic of light output (a plurality of dimples 240 which are all concave and circular are provided on the front surface of the lens 210; see Figs. 3A, 3C-4; pg. 5, last paragraph).
Regarding claim 8, Tomota discloses wherein the lens front surface comprises four concave circular dimples (a plurality of dimples 240 which are all concave and circular are provided on the front surface of the lens 210; see Figs. 3A, 3C-4; pg. 5, last paragraph).
Regarding claim 9, Tomota discloses a luminaire (luminaire 1 which comprises an optical lens 200; see Figs. 1-5C; Abstract; pg. 2, the last four paragraphs through pg. 3, first paragraph) comprising a light source (light source 100; see Figs. 2, 5A-5C; see all of pg. 3); a lens comprising a lens back surface configured to receive an input luminous flux and an opposing lens front surface configured to emit an output luminous flux (the optical lens 200 comprises a first lens 210 which has a plurality of lens portions 211 on a back surface thereof which receive light directly from the light source 100, and a plurality of dimples 240 on a front, light emitting surface thereof; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 3, last paragraph through pg. 5, top paragraph; pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 9, last paragraph through pg. 10, fourth paragraph); and a backend comprising a backend back surface and a backend front surface (the optical lens 200 comprises a second lens 220 which defines a backend having a back surface at concave/recess wall surface 222b, and a front surface at wall 223 of protrusion 221; see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; see pg. 4, third paragraph; pg. 5, first through seventh paragraphs; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs), the backend configured to receive a luminous flux from the light source and to redirect the received luminous flux onto the lens, the redirected luminous flux configured to increase a luminous efficacy of the luminaire (light emitted by light source 100 is emitted into the backend 220 through the backend back surface 222b and through recess bottom surface 222a to be refracted and undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend, to redirect the light towards the lens 210; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs); wherein the backend front surface is adjacent to the lens back surface (the backend 220 extends integrally from the back surface of the lens 210 like the various lens portions 211, and therefore an uppermost portion of the backend front surface 223 is directly adjacent to the back surface of the lens at the corner where it meets an innermost of the lens portions 211; see Figs. 3B-5C, especially Figs. 3B-4; pg. 4, second paragraph through pg. 5, seventh paragraph; pg. 6, fourth through fifth paragraphs); wherein the lens front surface comprises two or more concave circular dimples (a plurality of dimples 240 which are all concave and circular are provided on the front surface of the lens 210; see Figs. 3A, 3C-4; pg. 5, last paragraph).
Regarding claim 10, Tomota discloses wherein the backend front surface is coupled to and contiguous with the back surface of the lens (the backend 220 is integrally formed with the lens 210, with the protrusion 221 of the backend (and thus the backend front surface 223) protruding towards the light source 100 from the tips of the lens portions 211 on the back surface of the lens 210, thus forming an integral, contiguous surface; see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; pg. 5, first paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs).
Regarding claim 11, Tomota discloses wherein the backend back surface is configured to reflect at least a portion of the receive luminous flux onto the back surface of the lens (light from the light source 100 is emitted to the backend back surface 222b and is refracted to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend 220 (i.e., between the backend front surface 223 which is integral and contiguous with the lens back surface 211, and the backend back surface 222b), to redirect the light towards the lens 210; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs; the Examiner notes that since the protrusion 221 of the backend 220 protrudes from the protrusions 211 of the back surface of the lens 210, and therefore has an outer surface 223 integral and contiguous with the lens back surface to form an extension of the lens back surface, any light undergoing total internal reflection within the backend 220 after entering through backend back surface 222b which is internally reflected off backend front surface 223 back towards surface 222b will be internally reflected again back towards the surface 223 or to other areas of the lens).
Regarding claim 12, Tomota discloses wherein the backend back surface is configured to refract at least a portion of the received luminous flux and, via total internal reflection, is configured to transmit the refracted luminous flux into the lens (light from the light source 100 is emitted to the backend back surface 222b and is refracted to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend 220, to redirect the light towards the lens 210; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs).
Regarding claim 13, Tomota discloses wherein the lens is configured to receive a portion of the luminous flux from the light source directly from the light source (the lens 210 receives light directly from the light source 100 at the protrusions 211 on the lens back surface; see Figs. 5A-5B; see pg. 9, last paragraph through pg. 10, fourth paragraph).
Regarding claim 14, Tomota discloses wherein the lens front surface comprises four concave circular dimples (a plurality of dimples 240 which are all concave and circular are provided on the front surface of the lens 210; see Figs. 3A, 3C-4; pg. 5, last paragraph).
Regarding claim 15, Tomota discloses wherein the lens front surface comprises a circular concave mid-dimple disposed in the center of the four concave circular dimples, which are arranged in a square pattern (as shown in Fig. 3A; see annotated Fig. 3A on pg. 14 of the instant Office Action).
PNG
media_image1.png
650
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3A of Tomota (JP 2020077551), annotated and enlarged to label a center/mid-dimple surrounded by a plurality of dimples 240, at least four of which are arranged in a square pattern.
Regarding claims 16 and 21, Tomota discloses wherein the lens back surface comprises at least one circular convex bump (the back surface of the lens 210 comprises a plurality of lens portions 211 that form an annular zone of a Fresnel lens, specifically forming a plurality of annular protrusions that protrude towards the light source 100 and are formed in a concentric annular shape; see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; pg. 4, fourth paragraph through ninth paragraph (the paragraph spanning pgs. 4-5); pg. 9, last paragraph through pg. 10, fourth paragraph).
Regarding claim 18, Tomota discloses wherein the light source comprises at least one light emitting diode (LED) (the light source 100 is an LED light source; see Figs. 2, 5A-5C; see all of pg. 3).
Regarding claim 23, Tomota discloses wherein the backend front surface and the lens back surface are configured to facilitate total internal reflection of luminous flux received by the backend from the light source (light from the light source 100 is emitted to the backend back surface 222b and is refracted to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, between the surfaces of the backend 220, to redirect the light towards the lens 210, and outer surfaces of the lens portions 211 are total reflection surfaces which ensure light entering the inner (incident) surfaces of the lens portions 211 is also totally internally reflected; see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 2, last paragraph through pg. 5, last paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs; pg. 9, last paragraph through pg. 10, sixth paragraph, and pg. 10, ninth (last) paragraph).
Regarding claim 24, Tomota discloses wherein the backend front surface is coupled to the lens back surface (the backend 220 is integrally formed with the lens 210, with the protrusion 221 of the backend (and thus the backend front surface 223) protruding towards the light source 100 from the tips of the lens portions 211 on the back surface of the lens 210, thus forming an integral, contiguous surface; see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; pg. 5, first paragraph; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs).
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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomota (JP 2020077551, see previously attached machine translation) in view of Miyata (US 6,295,162, previously listed on the form PTO-892 mailed 3/5/2025). The teachings of Tomota have been discussed above.
However, the teachings of Tomota fail to disclose or fairly suggest a layer coupled to the front surface of the lens, the layer configured to provide a smooth outer surface.
Miyata teaches a lens comprising a lens back surface configured to receive an input luminous flux and an opposing lens front surface configured to emit an output luminous flux (a lenticular lens sheet 21 of a rear projection screen 20 which comprises a light source side on which lenticular lenses 21a are provided to define a back surface, and an observation-side surface or light-emerging-side surface defining an opposing front surface; see Fig. 2A; Abstract; col. 5, lines 36-54); wherein the lens front surface comprises two or more concave dimples (the front surface comprises a plurality of protrusions which define various concave areas or dimples between them; see Fig. 2A; col. 5, lines 39-45); and a layer coupled to the front surface of the lens, the layer configured to provide a smooth outer surface (a transparent smooth layer 22 is provided on the entire front surface of the lens 21; see Fig. 2A; col. 5, lines 39-54; col. 6, lines 5-9).
Therefore, in view of Miyata, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the luminaire of Tomota by coupling a layer configured to provide a smooth outer surface to the front surface of the lens. One would have been motivated to modify the known luminaire of Tomota by coupling a layer configured to provide a smooth outer surface to the front surface of the lens, as taught by Miyata, in order to prevent a roughening of the image in the emitted light and prevent scattering reflection at the light-emerging parts of the lens (see Miyata, col. 5, lines 50-54; col. 6, lines 5-9 for the motivation).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomota (JP 2020077551, see previously attached machine translation). The teachings of Tomota have been discussed above.
However, the teachings of Tomota fail to specifically disclose the lens and the backend are produced in a three-dimensional (3D) printing process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the luminaire of Tomota by producing the lens and the backend in a 3D printing process, since it has been held by the courts that the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is disclosed, or suggested, by the Prior Art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) and MPEP 2113. In this case, modifying the known luminaire of Tomota by producing the lens and the backend in a 3D printing process or any other known process would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the particular design requirements of a given application, in order to ensure the lens and backend are assembled in a suitable manner to be capable of providing their intended functionality.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomota (JP 2020077551, see previously attached machine translation) in view of Gasquet (US 6,755,556, previously listed on the form PTO-892 mailed 2/2/2024). The teachings of Tomota have been discussed above.
Tomota teaches wherein the two or more concave circular dimples comprise a first concave circular dimple and two or more second concave circular dimples (as shown in Fig. 3A; see annotated Fig. 3A on pg. 14 of the instant Office Action).
However, the teachings of Tomota fail to disclose or fairly suggest wherein a diameter of the first concave circular dimple is greater than diameters of the second concave circular dimples.
Gasquet teaches a lens structure (indicator light 10 which comprises an optical piece 12; see Figs. 1-6; col. 3, lines 26-67; col. 4, lines 1-11, 27-41) comprising a lens comprising a lens front surface and a lens back surface (optical piece 12 is a lens having a frustoconical rear face 56 that includes a plurality of frustoconical surfaces 62, 64, 66, 68, 70 (collectively referred to as reflection faces) that are stepped radially outward, and a frustoconical front face 58 comprising a plurality of radial annular front surfaces 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, 96 which are stepped radially outward from a central surface 80 to form exit faces of the lens forming a series of concentric rings; see Figs. 1-6; col. 3, lines 46-67; col. 4, lines 1-11, 27-41, 46-67; col. 5, lines 1-50, 57-67; col. 6, lines 1-28), wherein the lens front surface comprises two or more circular concave dimples (the lens front surface 58 comprises a plurality of radial annular front surfaces 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, 96 which are stepped radially outward from a central surface 80 to form exit faces of the lens forming a series of concentric rings, each comprising a plurality of concave dioptric elements 100; see Figs. 1-6; col. 5, lines 15-50, 57-67; col. 6, lines 1-28); wherein the two or more concave circular dimples comprise a first concave circular dimple and two or more second concave circular dimples (the concave circular dimples 100 on the central surface 80 define first concave circular dimples and the dimples 100 on the radial annular front surfaces 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, and 96 define second concave circular dimples; see Figs. 1-6; col. 5, lines 15-50, 57-67; col. 6, lines 1-28); wherein a diameter of the first concave circular dimple is greater than diameters of the second concave circular dimples (the concave circular dimples 100 on the central surface 80 have larger diameters than the dimples on the radial annular front surfaces 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, and 96; see Figs. 1-2, 5-6).
Therefore, in view of Gasquet, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lens structure of Tomota by forming the various concave circular dimples such that a diameter of the first concave circular dimple is greater than diameters of the second concave circular dimples. One would have been motivated to modify the known lens structure of Tomota by forming the various concave circular dimples such that a diameter of the first concave circular dimple is greater than diameters of the second concave circular dimples, as taught by Gasquet, in order to reduce spherical aberration and thereby provide improved beam shaping and better control over beam divergence and intensity distributions across the front surface of the lens.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument with respect to Tomota (JP 2020077551) that “Because for objects to be adjacent, contiguous, or coupled there must be at least two objects, amended claims 1 and 9, and dependent claims 2, 10, and 24, are not anticipated by Tomota” (see Applicant’s Remarks, pgs. 5-6), the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues that independent Claims 1 and 9 have been amended “to include the limitation that “the backend front surface is adjacent to the lens back surface”” and then argues “Applicant notes that claims 2, 10, and 24 provide the further limitation that the “backend front surface is coupled to and contiguous with the lens back surface”” (see Applicant’s Remarks, pg. 5). Applicant appears to be arguing the features of Claims 1 and 9 in terms of the features of dependent Claims 2, 10, and 24, by reading features recited solely in these dependent claims about the backend front surface being coupled to and contiguous with the lens back surface into the independent claims. However, there is currently no recitation in Claims 1 or 9 about the backend front surface being coupled to and contiguous with the lens back surface, as these features are recited in Claims 2, 10, and 24. Therefore Applicant’s argument with respect to the limitations found solely in dependent Claims 2, 10, and 24 is not germane to the rejection of independent Claims 1 and 9.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument that “for an object to possess the quality of being adjacent to, or contiguous with, or indeed coupled to another object requires two neighboring objects” (see Applicant’s Remarks, pg. 6), the Examiner agrees. Applicant appears to be suggesting that there is no disclosure in Tomota of two neighboring objects. However, Tomota explicitly describes an optical lens 200 comprising a first lens 210 and a second lens 220 which have been integrally formed into a single continuous/contiguous structure (see Figs. 2-3C, 5A-5C; pg. 3, last paragraph through pg. 4, fourth paragraph; pg. 5, first full paragraph; pg. 6, fourth-sixth paragraphs of machine translation). Tomota therefore clearly and explicitly describes two neighboring objects, a first lens 210 and a second lens 220, which have been integrally formed to be simultaneously adjacent to one another, coupled to one another, and contiguous with one another as two parts of a single lens structure 200.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to newly presented Claim 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument, since the newly presented limitations are addressed by the teachings of Gasquet (US 6,755,556).
Regarding the Applicant’s argument with respect to newly presented Claim 23 that “no combination of Tomota and Miyata discloses or suggests a backend front surface and a lense back surface configured to facilitate total internal reflection” (see Applicant’s Remarks, pg. 7), the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Tomota describes the second lens 220 which defines a backend comprising a back surface at concave/recess wall surface 222b, and a front surface at wall 223 of protrusion 221 (see Figs. 2, 3B-5C; see pg. 4, third paragraph; pg. 5, first through seventh paragraphs; pg. 6, second through sixth paragraphs), and describes the first lens 210 as having a plurality of lens portions 211 on a back surface thereof (see Figs. 2-5C; pg. 3, last paragraph through pg. 5, top paragraph). As explained by Tomota, the outer surface of the protrusion 221 (i.e. the outer surface of the backend front surface 223) is a total reflection surface, and light from the light source 100 is emitted to the backend back surface 222b and is refracted to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) within the protrusion 221, and thus between the surfaces of the backend 220 (including the backend front surface 223), to redirect the light towards the lens 210 (see pg. 5, seventh paragraph; pg. 10, fifth, sixth, and ninth (last) paragraph), and outer surfaces of the lens portions 211 on the back surface of the lens 210 are described as total reflection surfaces which ensure light entering the inner (incident) surfaces of the lens portions 211 is also totally internally reflected (see pg. 4, fourth paragraph through the paragraph spanning pgs. 4-5; pg. 9, last paragraph through pg. 10, sixth paragraph).
Accordingly, since both the wall surface 223 (backend front surface) and the outer walls of the lens portions 211 of the back surface of the lens 210 are described by Tomota as “total reflection surfaces”, both of these surfaces facilitate total internal reflection of light.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 WILLIAM N HARRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-3609. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00AM- 5:00PM EST, Alternate Fridays.
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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/WILLIAM N HARRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875