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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 9, and 11-14 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.
Applicant's arguments filed 5/19/2026, see page 6, with respect to newly added claim 15, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that claim 15 includes the features of previous claim 1, as well as the features of previous claims 2 and 5. Claims 1 and 5 were previously rejected over Stibich and Baxter, while claim 2 was previously rejected over Abe. Applicant has not provided additional arguments with respect to these references, and the rejection of this subject matter has been maintained.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 has overcome the rejections of claims 4 and 10, as described in detail, below.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Greuel U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0006995.
Regarding claim 1, Greuel discloses an ultraviolet light emission device comprising: an excimer lamp 32 (“A dielectric barrier discharge lamp 32” [Abstract] – “As will be explained with regard to the preferred embodiment, the gas filling preferably comprises Xenon. Dielectric barrier Xenon excimer discharge lamps have an emission band centered at 172 nm” [0008]) having an elongated shape (as illustrated in figure 3) and having a light emission surface 38 that emits ultraviolet light (“the UV light emitted from the lamp 32 through its lower wall 38 acting as a window” [0045]) toward an object for irradiation (“an interior volume 24, which may contain an object or a liquid to be disinfected” [Abstract]); a light intensity sensor 60 that is disposed around the excimer lamp 32 and detects ultraviolet light (“the UV sensor 60 constantly measures the received intensity of UV light” [0046]); and a first reflection member 26 (“The stainless steel material also reflects UVC radiation to a certain degree, such that the bottom surface 26 is sufficiently reflective for the intensity measurement described above” [0049]) disposed around the excimer lamp 32 (as illustrated in figure 2) and facing a part of the light emission surface 38 in a longitudinal direction of the excimer lamp 32 (as illustrated in figure 2), wherein the light intensity sensor 60 is positioned and configured such that ultraviolet light emitted directly from the light emission surface of the excimer lamp does not enter the light intensity sensor, and only ultraviolet light reflected by the first reflection member enters the light intensity sensor (“As illustrated in FIG. 2, the UV sensor 60 is arranged on sensor holder 62 such that it receives light from the lamp 32 via reflection only, where the major part of the sensor signal is generated by the reflective bottom surface 26 of the container” [0046]).
Regarding claim 3, Greuel discloses a second reflection member 20 disposed around the excimer lamp 32 and located lateral to the light emission surface (as illustrated in figure 2 – “A reflectivity of the container wall helps to increase the average irradiance level within the water” [0045] – “a stainless steel wall 20” [0051] – “Reflective surfaces to be used comprise e.g. Aluminum, stainless steel…” [0021]), wherein ultraviolet light reflected by the first reflection member is reflected by the second reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor (it is understood from figure 2 that at least some of the light from lamp 32 is reflected multiple times by the walls 20 and 26).
Regarding claim 5, Greuel illustrates in figures 2 and 3 that the light intensity sensor 60 faces the first reflection member 26 across the excimer lamp (“As illustrated in FIG. 2, the UV sensor 60 is arranged on sensor holder 62 such that it receives light from the lamp 32 via reflection only, where the major part of the sensor signal is generated by the reflective bottom surface 26 of the container” [0046]).
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(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greuel U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0006995 in view of Stibich U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0105100.
Regarding claim 6, Greuel discloses the claimed invention except that there is no explicit disclosure that a space between a periphery of the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor has an inert gas atmosphere.
Stibich discloses an ultraviolet light emission device (“a discharge lamp configured to generate ultraviolet light” [0035]) comprising: a lamp 22 having an elongated shape (as illustrated in figure 1) and having a light emission surface that emits ultraviolet light toward an object for irradiation (“the redirection of the ultraviolet light reduces the distance ultraviolet light travels to objects adjacent to the apparatus, including underside surfaces of objects as well as top and sidewall surfaces of objects” [0066]); a light intensity sensor 74 that is disposed around the excimer lamp and detects ultraviolet light (“sensor 74 may be used to monitor a parameter associated with the operation of discharge lamp 22 and, more specifically, may be used to monitor light emitted from discharge lamp 22 prior to passing through optical filter 40” [0080] – “one or more sensors, and sometimes a sensor for each discharge lamp unit, for determining… the amount or intensity of ultraviolet light reflected from a target object” [0120] – “any system known in the art for measuring ultraviolet light doses may be used for system 70. Examples include ultraviolet dosimeters and radiometers” [0078]); and a first reflection member 42 disposed around the lamp 22 and facing a part of the light emission surface in a longitudinal direction (as illustrated in figure 1), wherein ultraviolet light emitted from the light emission surface is reflected by the first reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor 74 (as illustrated in figure 1). Stibich discloses that a space between a periphery of the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor has an inert gas atmosphere (“Cooling system 44 shown in FIG. 1 is a forced air system including air inlet 46, air intake duct 48, fan 50, temperature sensor 52, air duct 54 and air outlet 56. In some cases, one or more of air inlet 46, air intake duct 48, air duct 54 and air outlet 56 may include air filters.” [0064]). The space between a periphery of the lamp 22 and the light intensity sensor 74 is a filtered air atmosphere ([Stibich: 0064]) which is an inert gas (“an inert gas, such as… clean air filtered by a filter” [Kobayashi et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2016/0240413: 0048]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Greuel with the inert gas atmosphere of Stibich in order to prevent contaminants, which may be formed by an interaction between the ultraviolet light emitted from an ultraviolet lamp and a surrounding atmosphere, from building up on an outer surface of the lamp, thereby reducing the effective amount of ultraviolet radiation emitted towards an object for irradiation.
Claim(s) 2, 9, 11, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greuel U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0006995 in view of Abe et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2005/0063451.
Regarding claim 2, Greuel discloses the claimed invention except that there is no explicit disclosure that the lamp includes a light-emitting tube having transparency to ultraviolet light, and a reflective film formed on an inner wall surface of the light-emitting tube and facing the light emission surface across a tube axis of the light-emitting tube.
Abe discloses an ultraviolet light emission device (“a light exposure apparatus per se, and a semiconductor device fabricated using these which are appropriate for exposure light of shorter wavelength in ultraviolet wavelength region or shorter” [0001]) comprising: a lamp includes a light-emitting tube having transparency to ultraviolet light (“The lamp 90 has a transparent bulb 91” [0334]), and a reflective film formed on an inner wall surface of the light-emitting tube and facing the light emission surface across a tube axis of the light-emitting tube (“The bulb 91 is configured so that the heat ray reflecting material layer 24 is provided on the surface of the glass-made base 23. The heat ray reflecting material layer 24 is provided for the purpose of returning the infrared radiation generated by the filament 93 back to the filament 93” [0334]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Greuel with the reflecting material of Abe in order to provide improved filtering and/or directional control over the emission of light from a lamp so as to more appropriately focus the light in a direction in which it is desired that the light be irradiated.
Regarding claim 9, Greuel discloses a second reflection member 20 disposed around the excimer lamp 32 and located lateral to the light emission surface (as illustrated in figure 2 – “A reflectivity of the container wall helps to increase the average irradiance level within the water” [0045] – “a stainless steel wall 20” [0051] – “Reflective surfaces to be used comprise e.g. Aluminum, stainless steel…” [0021]), wherein ultraviolet light reflected by the first reflection member is reflected by the second reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor (it is understood from figure 2 that at least some of the light from lamp 32 is reflected multiple times by the walls 20 and 26).
Regarding claim 11, Greuel illustrates in figures 2 and 3 that the light intensity sensor 60 faces the first reflection member 26 across the excimer lamp (“As illustrated in FIG. 2, the UV sensor 60 is arranged on sensor holder 62 such that it receives light from the lamp 32 via reflection only, where the major part of the sensor signal is generated by the reflective bottom surface 26 of the container” [0046]).
Regarding claim 13, Greuel discloses that the light emission surface 38 is a lower surface of the light-emitting tube 32 (as illustrated in figures 2 and 3), the ultraviolet light emission device including a plurality of the excimer lamps that is arranged in a lateral direction such that tube axes of the light-emitting tubes are parallel to each other (as illustrated in figure 7), and a plurality of the light intensity sensors each of which is disposed above the corresponding one of the excimer lamps (“In the case of lamps arranged at both ends of the container, each end may also comprise a sensor for monitoring operation of the lamp on the opposite side” [0022]).
Regarding claim 14, Greuel illustrates in figure 7 that the second reflection member 20/16 is disposed between the excimer lamps adjacent to each other.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greuel U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0006995 in view of Abe et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2005/0063451 in further view of Stibich U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0105100.
Regarding claim 12, Greuel discloses the claimed invention except that there is no explicit disclosure that a space between a periphery of the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor has an inert gas atmosphere.
Stibich discloses an ultraviolet light emission device (“a discharge lamp configured to generate ultraviolet light” [0035]) comprising: a lamp 22 having an elongated shape (as illustrated in figure 1) and having a light emission surface that emits ultraviolet light toward an object for irradiation (“the redirection of the ultraviolet light reduces the distance ultraviolet light travels to objects adjacent to the apparatus, including underside surfaces of objects as well as top and sidewall surfaces of objects” [0066]); a light intensity sensor 74 that is disposed around the excimer lamp and detects ultraviolet light (“sensor 74 may be used to monitor a parameter associated with the operation of discharge lamp 22 and, more specifically, may be used to monitor light emitted from discharge lamp 22 prior to passing through optical filter 40” [0080] – “one or more sensors, and sometimes a sensor for each discharge lamp unit, for determining… the amount or intensity of ultraviolet light reflected from a target object” [0120] – “any system known in the art for measuring ultraviolet light doses may be used for system 70. Examples include ultraviolet dosimeters and radiometers” [0078]); and a first reflection member 42 disposed around the lamp 22 and facing a part of the light emission surface in a longitudinal direction (as illustrated in figure 1), wherein ultraviolet light emitted from the light emission surface is reflected by the first reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor 74 (as illustrated in figure 1). Stibich discloses that a space between a periphery of the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor has an inert gas atmosphere (“Cooling system 44 shown in FIG. 1 is a forced air system including air inlet 46, air intake duct 48, fan 50, temperature sensor 52, air duct 54 and air outlet 56. In some cases, one or more of air inlet 46, air intake duct 48, air duct 54 and air outlet 56 may include air filters.” [0064]). The space between a periphery of the lamp 22 and the light intensity sensor 74 is a filtered air atmosphere ([Stibich: 0064]) which is an inert gas (“an inert gas, such as… clean air filtered by a filter” [Kobayashi et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2016/0240413: 0048]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Greuel with the inert gas atmosphere of Stibich in order to prevent contaminants, which may be formed by an interaction between the ultraviolet light emitted from an ultraviolet lamp and a surrounding atmosphere, from building up on an outer surface of the lamp, thereby reducing the effective amount of ultraviolet radiation emitted towards an object for irradiation.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stibich U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0105100 in view of Baxter et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0041901 in further view of Abe et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2005/0063451.
Regarding claim 15, Stibich discloses an ultraviolet light emission device (“a discharge lamp configured to generate ultraviolet light” [0035]) comprising: a lamp 22 having an elongated shape (as illustrated in figure 1) and having a light emission surface that emits ultraviolet light toward an object for irradiation (“the redirection of the ultraviolet light reduces the distance ultraviolet light travels to objects adjacent to the apparatus, including underside surfaces of objects as well as top and sidewall surfaces of objects” [0066]); a light intensity sensor 74 that is disposed around the excimer lamp and detects ultraviolet light (“sensor 74 may be used to monitor a parameter associated with the operation of discharge lamp 22 and, more specifically, may be used to monitor light emitted from discharge lamp 22 prior to passing through optical filter 40” [0080] – “one or more sensors, and sometimes a sensor for each discharge lamp unit, for determining… the amount or intensity of ultraviolet light reflected from a target object” [0120] – “any system known in the art for measuring ultraviolet light doses may be used for system 70. Examples include ultraviolet dosimeters and radiometers” [0078]); and a first reflection member 42 disposed around the lamp 22 and facing a part of the light emission surface in a longitudinal direction (as illustrated in figure 1), wherein ultraviolet light emitted from the light emission surface is reflected by the first reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor 74 (as illustrated in figure 1). Stibich discloses the claimed invention except that there is no explicit disclosure that the ultraviolet discharge lamp is an excimer lamp.
Baxter discloses an ultraviolet light emission device comprising: an excimer lamp 900 (“The inventive device would use 207 nm or 222 nm excimer technology” [0012]) having an elongated shape (“The Far UV C bulbs 900 for a troffer would ideally be elongated rather than short” [0107]) and having a light emission surface that emits ultraviolet light toward an object for irradiation (“to best sterilize the area” [0115]) and a first reflection member 908 disposed around the excimer lamp 900 and facing a part of the light emission surface in a longitudinal direction (as illustrated in figure 10), further comprising a second reflection member 926 disposed around the excimer lamp 900 and located lateral to the light emission surface (as illustrated in figure 10), further comprising a third reflection member 928. It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stibich with the excimer lamp of Baxter in order to utilize a commercially available light source for embodying the ultraviolet light source of Stibich. Baxter and Stibich disclose the claimed invention except that there is no explicit disclosure that the lamp includes a light-emitting tube having transparency to ultraviolet light, and a reflective film formed on an inner wall surface of the light-emitting tube and facing the light emission surface across a tube axis of the light-emitting tube.
Abe discloses an ultraviolet light emission device (“a light exposure apparatus per se, and a semiconductor device fabricated using these which are appropriate for exposure light of shorter wavelength in ultraviolet wavelength region or shorter” [0001]) comprising: a lamp includes a light-emitting tube having transparency to ultraviolet light (“The lamp 90 has a transparent bulb 91” [0334]), and a reflective film formed on an inner wall surface of the light-emitting tube and facing the light emission surface across a tube axis of the light-emitting tube (“The bulb 91 is configured so that the heat ray reflecting material layer 24 is provided on the surface of the glass-made base 23. The heat ray reflecting material layer 24 is provided for the purpose of returning the infrared radiation generated by the filament 93 back to the filament 93” [0334]). It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stibich and Baxter with the reflecting material of Abe in order to provide improved filtering and/or directional control over the emission of light from a lamp so as to more appropriately focus the light in a direction in which it is desired that the light be irradiated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 10 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.
Regarding claim 4; Greuel U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0006995 discloses an ultraviolet light emission device comprising: an excimer lamp 32 (“A dielectric barrier discharge lamp 32” [Abstract] – “As will be explained with regard to the preferred embodiment, the gas filling preferably comprises Xenon. Dielectric barrier Xenon excimer discharge lamps have an emission band centered at 172 nm” [0008]) having an elongated shape (as illustrated in figure 3) and having a light emission surface 38 that emits ultraviolet light (“the UV light emitted from the lamp 32 through its lower wall 38 acting as a window” [0045]) toward an object for irradiation (“an interior volume 24, which may contain an object or a liquid to be disinfected” [Abstract]); a light intensity sensor 60 that is disposed around the excimer lamp 32 and detects ultraviolet light (“the UV sensor 60 constantly measures the received intensity of UV light” [0046]); and a first reflection member 26 (“The stainless steel material also reflects UVC radiation to a certain degree, such that the bottom surface 26 is sufficiently reflective for the intensity measurement described above” [0049]) disposed around the excimer lamp 32 (as illustrated in figure 2) and facing a part of the light emission surface 38 in a longitudinal direction of the excimer lamp 32 (as illustrated in figure 2), wherein the light intensity sensor 60 is positioned and configured such that ultraviolet light emitted directly from the light emission surface of the excimer lamp does not enter the light intensity sensor, and only ultraviolet light reflected by the first reflection member enters the light intensity sensor (“As illustrated in FIG. 2, the UV sensor 60 is arranged on sensor holder 62 such that it receives light from the lamp 32 via reflection only, where the major part of the sensor signal is generated by the reflective bottom surface 26 of the container” [0046]). However, although Greuel illustrates in figure 3 that sensor 60 is surrounded by sensor holder 62, there is no disclosure that this holder is reflective and there is no other reflective member disposed between the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor, wherein ultraviolet light reflected by the second reflection member is reflected by the third reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor.
Stibich U.S. PGPUB No. 2023/0105100 discloses an ultraviolet light emission device (“a discharge lamp configured to generate ultraviolet light” [0035]) comprising: a lamp 22 having an elongated shape (as illustrated in figure 1) and having a light emission surface that emits ultraviolet light toward an object for irradiation (“the redirection of the ultraviolet light reduces the distance ultraviolet light travels to objects adjacent to the apparatus, including underside surfaces of objects as well as top and sidewall surfaces of objects” [0066]); a light intensity sensor 74 that is disposed around the excimer lamp and detects ultraviolet light (“sensor 74 may be used to monitor a parameter associated with the operation of discharge lamp 22 and, more specifically, may be used to monitor light emitted from discharge lamp 22 prior to passing through optical filter 40” [0080] – “one or more sensors, and sometimes a sensor for each discharge lamp unit, for determining… the amount or intensity of ultraviolet light reflected from a target object” [0120] – “any system known in the art for measuring ultraviolet light doses may be used for system 70. Examples include ultraviolet dosimeters and radiometers” [0078]); and a first reflection member 42 disposed around the lamp 22 and facing a part of the light emission surface in a longitudinal direction (as illustrated in figure 1), wherein ultraviolet light emitted from the light emission surface is reflected by the first reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor 74 (as illustrated in figure 1). However, Stibich does not disclose that the light intensity sensor is positioned and configured such that ultraviolet light emitted directly from the light emission surface of the excimer lamp does not enter the light intensity sensor, and only ultraviolet light reflected by the first reflection member enters the light intensity sensor, wherein a third reflection member disposed between the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor, wherein ultraviolet light reflected by the second reflection member is reflected by the third reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor.
The prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest, in combination with the other claim limitations, An ultraviolet light emission device comprising: a light intensity sensor is positioned and configured such that ultraviolet light emitted directly from a light emission surface of an elongated excimer lamp does not enter the light intensity sensor, and only ultraviolet light reflected by a first reflection member enters the light intensity sensor, wherein a third reflection member disposed between the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor; a second reflection member disposed around the excimer lamp and located lateral to the light emission surface; and a third reflection member disposed between the excimer lamp and the light intensity sensor, wherein ultraviolet light reflected by the second reflection member is reflected by the third reflection member and enters the light intensity sensor.
Regarding claim 10; claim 10 includes substantially similar limitations to those of claim 4 and is allowable at least for the reasons indicated with respect to claim 4.
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 JASON L MCCORMACK whose telephone number is (571)270-1489. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/JASON L MCCORMACK/ Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights