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
Receipt of the Amendment, filed on May 31, 2026, is acknowledged.
Cancellation of claim 2 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 3-6 are pending in the instant application.
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, 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xie et al. (CN 1444271 A).
Regarding claim 1, Xie discloses a light-emitting device (Fig. 2K), comprising: a light-emitting element (20) mounted on a substrate (60); a lens (40) disposed on the substrate so as to cover the light-emitting element; and a sealing liquid (30) disposed in a space defined under the lens to seal the light-emitting element, wherein an inner surface of the lens (40) comprises a depression that is recessed upward at a position not overlapping an optical axis of the light-emitting element (20), wherein a position of the depression is higher than a position of a point on the inner surface that is located on the optical axis (Fig. 1), and wherein a height of the inner surface monotonically increases from the point on the optical axis to the depression, wherein an air bubble (31) is included in at least a portion of the depression, and wherein the air bubble (31) is movable in the sealing liquid due to buoyancy (Page 9, lines 4-9).
Regarding claim 4, Xie discloses a light-emitting device wherein the depression is provided in a position where horizontal position thereof does not overlap the light-emitting element (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Xie discloses a light-emitting device wherein the inner surface of the lens (40) comprises a protrusion located at a position overlapping the optical axis and curved toward the light-emitting element (20, Fig. 1).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie et al. (CN 1444271 A) in view of Lunev et al. (US 2022/0328729 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Xie fails to exemplify wherein the sealing liquid comprises a fluorine-based oil. Lunev discloses a light-emitting device (Fig. 1E), comprising: a light-emitting element (50) mounted on a substrate (100); a lens (100) disposed on the substrate so as to cover the light-emitting element; and a sealing liquid (80) disposed in a space defined under the lens to seal the light-emitting element, wherein the sealing liquid comprises a fluorine-based oil (¶[0032]) in order to improve light extraction and heat extraction of the light-emitting element (¶[0035]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate the fluorine-based oil sealing liquid as disclosed by Lunev in the light-emitting device of Xie in order to improve light extraction and heat extraction of the light-emitting element.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie et al. (CN 1444271 A) in view of Fujikawa et al. (US 2020/0157392 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Xie fails to exemplify wherein the depression comprises an annular planar pattern that surrounds the optical axis. Fujikawa discloses a light-emitting device (Fig. 6), comprising: a light-emitting element (8) mounted on a substrate (9); a lens (1’) disposed on the substrate so as to cover the light-emitting element, wherein an inner surface of the lens (1’) comprises a depression that is recessed upward at a position not overlapping an optical axis of the light-emitting element (8), wherein a position of the depression is higher than a position of a point on the inner surface that is located on the optical axis (Fig. 6), and wherein a height of the inner surface monotonically increases from the point on the optical axis to the depression (Fig. 6), wherein the depression comprises an annular planar pattern that surrounds the optical axis (Fig. 5, ¶[0126]). One skilled in the art would have reasonably contemplate optimizing the shape of the depression surrounding a central region of the lens to have an annular planar shape, as an obvious matter of design engineering. It has been held that a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the pression having a annular planar pattern as disclosed by Fujikawa in the light-emitting device of Xie, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3-6 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 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.
Conclusion
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 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, James R. Greece, can be reached on (571) 272-3711. 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.
/Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
Prosecution Insights