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
The amendment filed by the Applicant on 10/16/23 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1,5,7,8, 9-11 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebner (DE 102011085275 A1, cited previously) in view of Smith (US 20150285442 A1, cited previously) and further in view of Dross (US 20190003685, cited previously)
Regarding claim 1, Ebner teaches a light fixture (Fig.1), comprising: a fixture housing 3; and one or more lighting subassemblies(35 in Fig.3) in the fixture housing, each of the lighting subassemblies comprising: a light source (LED in recess 3) for emitting the light, and an optical element (6,7,8 in Fig.1) disposed in the fixture housing, the optical element receiving the light from the light source and directing the light toward a top surface of the optical element along an axis of the optical element, the optical element including an inner surface disposed axially around and at least partially enclosing the axis of the optical element, the inner surface at least partially containing the light within the optical element by internal reflection of the light (see in Ebner: Instead, the desired total reflection of the incident light beams can now also be achieved in these areas, so that ultimately the efficiency of the optical element according to the invention 20 Overall, significantly improved), the inner surface including first and second geometric (shapes 7 and 8 or 31 and 32 in Fig.6 or 15 and 8 in Fig.7) coaxially disposed with respect to the axis of the optical element.
Ebner does not teach the first and second geometric shapes defining two concentric circles having first and second respective radii, the first and second radii being different, at least a portion of the first geometric shapes extending to corners of an emission surface of the optical element.
Smith teaches a reflecting unit wherein the first 24 (Fig.5 and Fig.1-4) and second 26 geometric shapes defining two concentric circles having first and second respective radii, the first and second radii being different, at least a portion of the first geometric shapes extending to corners of an emission surface (54 in Fig.10 that applies to Fig.1-5 and [0036]) of the optical element.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use different radii for the inner contour of the optical element as disclosed in Smith, the device of Ebner, in order to achieve the desired collimated beam.
Ebner in view of Smith does not teach:
the inner surface including third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis and defining an additional concentric circle having a third radius different than the first and second radii, each of the third geometric shapes being disposed between a corresponding neighbor first geometric shape and a corresponding neighbor second geometric shape and a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple color.
Dross teaches a light fixture wherein the inner surface including third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis and defining an additional concentric circle having a third radius different than the first and second radii, each of the third geometric shapes being disposed between a corresponding neighbor first geometric shape and a corresponding neighbor second geometric shape (Fig.15,16 and 17, [0015], [0097], [0098],[011], [0108], [0111], [0116])
PNG
media_image1.png
577
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple color ([0113] and [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use different radii for the inner contour of the optical element as disclosed in Dross, the device of Ebner in view of Smith, in order to achieve better tessellation/color mixing ([0113], [0015]).
Regarding claims 4 and 8, Ebner in view of Smith, Dross and Dross teaches a light fixture wherein the first, second and third geometric shapes define concentric circles having the first, the second and a third respective radii, the first, second and third radii being different (Fig.15,16 and 17, [0015], [0097], [0098],[011], [0108], [0111], [0116]).
Regarding claim 5, Ebner teaches a lighting subassembly for a light fixture having a first surface through which light can be emitted, comprising: a light source for emitting the light, and an optical element for receiving the light from the light source and directing the light toward the surface along an axis of the optical element, the optical element including an inner surface disposed axially around and at least partially enclosing the axis of the optical element, the inner surface at least partially containing the light within the optical element by internal reflection of the light, the inner surface being defined by at least two geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis of the optical element (see rejection in claim 1 above).
Ebner does not teach the at least two geometric shapes defining two concentric circles having first and second respective radii, the first and second radii being different, at least a portion of the at least two geometric shapes extending to corners of an emission surface of the optical element.
Smith teaches a reflecting unit wherein at least two geometric shapes (24,26 in Fig.1-5) defining two concentric circles having first and second respective radii, the first and second radii being different, at least a portion of the at least two geometric shapes extending to corners of an emission surface of the optical element (54 in Fig.10 that applies to Fig.1-5 and [0036]) of the optical element.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use different radii for the inner contour of the optical element as disclosed in Smith, the device of Ebner, in order to achieve the desired collimated beam.
Ebner in view of Smith does not teach:
the inner surface including third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis and defining an additional concentric circle having a third radius different than the first and second radii, each of the third geometric shapes being disposed between a corresponding neighbor first geometric shape and a corresponding neighbor second geometric shape and a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple color.
Dross teaches a light fixture wherein the inner surface including third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis and defining an additional concentric circle having a third radius different than the first and second radii, each of the third geometric shapes being disposed between a corresponding neighbor first geometric shape and a corresponding neighbor second geometric shape (Fig.15,16 and 17, [0015], [0097], [0098],[011], [0108], [0111], [0116])
PNG
media_image1.png
577
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple color ([0113] and [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use different radii for the inner contour of the optical element as disclosed in Dross, the device of Ebner in view of Smith, in order to achieve better tessellation/color mixing ([0113], [0015]).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Ebner in view of Smith and Dross teaches the lighting sub-assembly wherein the emission surface of the optical element is rectangular or square (see top profile/shape in Fig.1-5,10 in Smith).
Regarding claim 23, Ebner in view of Smith and Dross teaches the light assembly, comprising: a plurality of the subassemblies arranged in an array (from the teachings of Fig.10 and 11 of Ebner, Fig.1 and 2 of Smith and all of Figures 3 and 4 of Dross) wherein the first surface extends over the plurality of subassemblies and includes a plurality of regions; wherein each of the regions extends over a different one of the subassemblies, wherein each of the regions includes a pattern of the optical features (from the teachings of 17 in Fig.1A of Dross, wherein 17 has optical features, and from the teachings of the top surface 54 in Fig.10-17 of Smith and where Smith explicitly discloses in [0036]: and light emission surfaces 52 and 54 are selected to achieve a pre-determined result, e.g., a beam substantially collimated relative to axis A. And it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the top surface over the entire array of subassemblies, such that each region has the same or different desired pattern, based on the desired orientation or desired distribution of light).
Regarding claim 7, Ebner in view of Smith and Dross teaches the invention set forth in claims 1 and 9 above, but is silent regarding a third geometric shape coaxially disposed with the first and second geometric shapes
Dross teaches a light fixture wherein a third geometric shape coaxially disposed with the first and second geometric shapes (Fig.15,16 and 17, [0015], [0097], [0098],[011], [0108], [0111], [0116]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use different radii for the inner contour of the optical element as disclosed in Dross, the device of Ebner in view of Smith and Dross, in order to achieve better tessellation ([0015]).
Regarding claim 8, Ebner in view of Smith, Dross and Dross teaches a light fixture wherein the first, second and third geometric shapes define concentric circles having the first, the second and a third respective radii, the first, second and third radii being different (Fig.15,16 and 17, [0015], [0097], [0098],[011], [0108], [0111], [0116]).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebner in view of Smith and Dross and further in view of Eichele (WO 2019175389 A1, cited previously)
Regarding claims 12-14, Ebner in view of Smith and Dross teaches the invention set forth in claim 5 above but is silent regarding: the plurality of LED sources comprise a cluster of individual LEDs having different colors (for claim 12); wherein the cluster of individual LEDs comprises a red LED, a green LED, a blue LED and a white LED (for claim 13) and wherein the plurality of LED sources comprise a red-green-blue-white quad LED source (claim 14).
However, colors in the LED clusters is a design choice.
Eichele teaches in its claim 14 and in the following paragraphs:
According to a preferred embodiment, the LEDs within the LED cluster have different colors. For example, the LED colors in an LED cluster may include red, green and blue. By the light mixture, white light can be generated. A single cluster would still show color differences, because the mixture of light within a cluster with an optic, as far as it is not light scattering, not sufficient for complete mixing of the light of the LEDs. The inventive arrangement of several clusters, which are twisted to each other, however, this effect is compensated, so that the different LED colors in the entire headlamp are mixed so far that, for example, white light can be generated. Any other mixed color can also be generated, in which case the number of red, green and blue LED colors are selected accordingly. It is also possible to mix the light of different colored clusters, each having a uniform light color, by rotating the clusters. This may be predetermined as an alternative or in addition to the color mixing within the clusters.
FIG. 5 shows an embodiment with six LED clusters 12, each having a 4x4 matrix of LEDs. In this embodiment, however, differently colored LEDs 9, 10 and 11 in the colors red, green and blue are combined in each cluster. Also in this embodiment, the clusters are rotated at the angle a against each other, as in the previous embodiments described. The light of the cluster 12 is already mixed within the clusters, so that the color red, green and blue produces approximately white light. However, the light mixture within the clusters 12 is still insufficient. By using multiple clusters 12 that are rotated to each other, this effect of the light mixture is also improved, so that the total light of the headlight appears almost uniformly white.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use combination of various colors as claimed, in the clusters of Ebner in view of Smith and Dross, based on the desired design and color output, in order to achieve an improved color mixture output.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of Dross
Regarding claim 16, Smith teaches a lighting subassembly for a light fixture (Fig.1 and 2) having a first surface through which light can be emitted, comprising: a light source for emitting the light, wherein the light source comprises an optical element for receiving the light from the light source and directing the light toward the surface along an axis of the optical element, the optical element including an inner surface disposed axially around and at least partially enclosing the axis of the optical element, the inner surface at least partially containing the light within the optical element by internal reflection of the light, the inner surface being defined by at least two geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis of the optical element.
Smith does not explicitly teach:
the light source comprises a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple colors, and the inner surface is configured to generate a desired color profile;
AND
wherein the first surface comprises one or more optical features that affect optical performance; and wherein the one or more optical features are in the group consisting of color mixing portions, optical distribution portions, collimators and diffusers.
Smith does not teach:
the inner surface including third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis and defining an additional concentric circle having a third radius different than the first and second radii, each of the third geometric shapes being disposed between a corresponding neighbor first geometric shape and a corresponding neighbor second geometric shape and a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple color.
Dross teaches a light fixture wherein the inner surface including third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis and defining an additional concentric circle having a third radius different than the first and second radii, each of the third geometric shapes being disposed between a corresponding neighbor first geometric shape and a corresponding neighbor second geometric shape (Fig.15,16 and 17, [0015], [0097], [0098],[011], [0108], [0111], [0116])
PNG
media_image1.png
577
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) sources, wherein the plurality of LED sources have multiple color ([0113] and [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use different radii for the inner contour of the optical element as disclosed in Dross, the device of Smith, in order to achieve better tessellation/color mixing ([0113], [0015]).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of Dross and further in view of Eichele (WO 2019175389 A1, cited previously)
Regarding claims 17-19, Smith in view of Dross teaches the invention set forth in claim 5 above but is silent regarding: the plurality of LED sources comprise a cluster of individual LEDs having different colors (for claim 17); wherein the cluster of individual LEDs comprises a red LED, a green LED, a blue LED and a white LED (for claim 18) and wherein the plurality of LED sources comprise a red-green-blue-white quad LED source (claim 19).
However, colors in the LED clusters is a design choice.
Eichele teaches in its claim 14 and in the following paragraphs:
According to a preferred embodiment, the LEDs within the LED cluster have different colors. For example, the LED colors in an LED cluster may include red, green and blue. By the light mixture, white light can be generated. A single cluster would still show color differences, because the mixture of light within a cluster with an optic, as far as it is not light scattering, not sufficient for complete mixing of the light of the LEDs. The inventive arrangement of several clusters, which are twisted to each other, however, this effect is compensated, so that the different LED colors in the entire headlamp are mixed so far that, for example, white light can be generated. Any other mixed color can also be generated, in which case the number of red, green and blue LED colors are selected accordingly. It is also possible to mix the light of different colored clusters, each having a uniform light color, by rotating the clusters. This may be predetermined as an alternative or in addition to the color mixing within the clusters.
FIG. 5 shows an embodiment with six LED clusters 12, each having a 4x4 matrix of LEDs. In this embodiment, however, differently colored LEDs 9, 10 and 11 in the colors red, green and blue are combined in each cluster. Also in this embodiment, the clusters are rotated at the angle a against each other, as in the previous embodiments described. The light of the cluster 12 is already mixed within the clusters, so that the color red, green and blue produces approximately white light. However, the light mixture within the clusters 12 is still insufficient. By using multiple clusters 12 that are rotated to each other, this effect of the light mixture is also improved, so that the total light of the headlight appears almost uniformly white.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use combination of various colors as claimed, in the clusters of Smith in view of Dross, based on desired design and color output, in order to achieve an improved color mixture output.
Claims 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebner (DE 102011085275 A1, cited previously) in view of Smith (US 20150285442 A1, cited previously) and Dross and further in view of Dross2 (WO 2006033032 A1, hereafter Dross2)
Regarding claims 21 and 22, Ebner in view of Smith and Dross teaches the invention set forth in claims 1 and 5 above (see disclosure of Dross in claims 1 and 5 above).
Further even more, regarding a size, a shape and a position of the inner surfaces (considered as facets) are configured to control internal reflection such that an output illumination can be generated having the desired color profile; Dross2 discloses from faceted (sides 3 in Fig.1B):
the light emitters comprising at least a first light-emitting diode of a first primary color and at least a second light-emitting diode of a second primary color, the first and the second primary colors being distinct from each other, a facetted light-collimator for collimating light emitted by the light emitters, the facetted light-collimator being arranged along a longitudinal axis of the illumination system, light propagation in the facetted light-collimator being based on total internal reflection or on reflection at a reflective coating provided on the facets of the facetted light collimator, the facetted light-collimator merging into a facetted light-reflector at a side facing away from the light source, the illumination system further comprising a light-shaping diffuser. By combining a light source comprising a set of differently colored light emitters with a facetted light-collimator that uses total internal reflection (TIR) to collimate the light, a facetted light-reflector and a light-shaping diffuser, an illumination system is obtained with a uniform spatial and spatio-angular color distribution of the light emitted by the light emitters. The light-collimator is facetted to optimally mix the various colors emitted by the light emitters.
Therefore, from the teachings of Dross, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use combination of various colors along with the faceted sides and by using total internal reflection, in the device of Smith in view of Dross, in order to achieve the desired output color distribution.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebner in view of Smith and Dross and further in view of Gao (CN 109163304 A)
Regarding claim 24, Ebner in view of Smith and Dross teaches the invention set forth in claim 1 above,but is silent regarding a third geometric shapes coaxially disposed with respect to the axis of the optical element, the third geometric shape defining a third concentric circles having third radius different from the first radius and the second radius.
Gao teaches: The light distribution system has the first and second reflection arcs, the transition section, and the third and fourth reflection arcs along the optical axis direction, so that the light spot formed by the bicycle lamp is separated by two upper and lower sides, and each spot is substantially rectangular and it is matter of design to increase the segments having more than 2 radius of curvatures based on the desired complexity of the output light distribution, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to use more than 2 arcs with different radius of curvation, as disclosed in Gao, in the device of Ebner in view of Smith and Dross in order to achieve the desired light distribution.
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed by the Application on 7/7/26 is acknowledged. However, they are not found to be persuasive. The amended portions corresponds to claims 3 and 4, that is disclosed in Dross. However, Applicant has not addressed this prior art in the arguments.
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.
of a Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatima Farokhrooz whose telephone number is (571)-272-6043. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday, 9 am - 5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, James Greece can be reached on (571) 272-3711.
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.
/Fatima N Farokhrooz/
Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights