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 .
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) 1, 3-5, 9-11, 14, 16-19, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gurtl (EP3540294A1, with reference made to provided machine translation) in view of Matsuba et al. (US Pub. 20090052182, Matsuba).
As per claim 1, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) an automotive lighting apparatus comprising: a heatsink (heatsink 7); a lighting module (shown in figure 3) coupled to the heat sink, the lighting module comprising one or more light sources (LED in light source 2, see paragraph 46), a light source driver (control device 6a) for driving the one or more light sources (paragraph 48); at least one microlens array (micro-exit optics array 41) comprising a plurality of microlenses (micro exit optics 41a to 41d) comprising a plurality of sections (areas corresponding to aperture regions 42a to 42d), wherein each microlens array section is configured to project an image using light from the one or more light sources (paragraph 39); a collimating assembly (light collimating optical body 21) arranged between the lighting module and the at least one microlens array comprising: one or more collimators corresponding respectively to the one or more light sources, wherein each of the one or more collimators is aligned in a light path from a corresponding one of the one or more light source and the at least one microlens array (see figure 3 and paragraphs 37 and 46-47) wherein one or more light sources comprise a plurality of light sources, and wherein the one or more collimators comprise a plurality of collimators, wherein each light source corresponds to one of the plurality of collimators and one of the microlens array sections wherein each light source of the lighting module aligns with a corresponding collimator and a corresponding microlens array section (see figures 2 and 3 and paragraphs 37 and 46-47).
Gurtl does not teach that the collimating assembly comprises a housing coupled to the lighting module, the housing including a first receptacle or slot configured to receive the one or more collimators in a side loaded manner and a second receptacle or slot configured to receive the at least one microlens array in a side loaded manner.
However, Matsuba teaches (in figure 1-2) providing a housing (lens housing 21) coupled to a lighting module (light source unit 10), the housing including a first receptacle or slot (light shielding mask holding grooves 36) configured to receive the one or more collimators (light shielding mask 24) in a side loaded manner and a second receptacle or slot (fly-eye lens holding grooves 37) configured to receive the at least one microlens array (fly-eye lens 23) in a side loaded manner, in order to allow for interchangeability of the elements (paragraph 46).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Gurtl to include a housing as suggested by Matsuba in order to allow for interchangeability.
As per claim 3, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) a controller (control device 6) configured to control operation of the one or more light sources, wherein the controller is configured to cause the each of the plurality of light sources to selectively emit light to one or more of the microlens array sections (paragraph 48).
As per claim 4, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the is controller is configured to cause the plurality of light sources to emit light at a same time to the at least one microlens array so as to form a single projected image, wherein each microlens array section projects an image that forms a part of the single projected image (see figure 2 and paragraph 39).
As per claim 5, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the is controller is configured to cause the plurality of light sources to respectively emit light at different times so that the at least one microlens array respectively projects a plurality of images at the different times, wherein each microlens array section projects one of the plurality of projected images at the different times (paragraph 39).
As per claim 9, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the plurality of light sources is configured to emit a plurality of colors (paragraph 37).
As per claim 10, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that each the plurality of light sources is configured to emit a single color (paragraph 37).
As per claim 11, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the one or more light sources comprise one or more light-emitting diodes (paragraph 46).
As per claim 14, Gurtl in view of Matsuba teaches that the one or more collimators (light collimating optical body 21 in Gurtl corresponding to light shielding mask 24 in Matsuba) are insertable in the first receptacle or slot (light shielding mask holding grooves 36 from Matsuba) of the housing (lens housing 21 from Matsuba) so as to be removably couplable to the housing (see paragraph 46 in Matsuba).
As per claim 16, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) a method for operating an automotive lighting apparatus comprising: a heatsink (heatsink 7); a lighting module (shown in figure 3) coupled to the heat sink, the lighting module comprising one or more light sources (LED in light source 2, see paragraph 46), a light source driver (control device 6a) for driving the one or more light sources (paragraph 48); at least one microlens array (micro-exit optics array 41) comprising a plurality of microlenses (micro exit optics 41a to 41d), the at least one microlens array comprising a plurality of micro lens array sections (areas corresponding to aperture regions 42a to 42d), wherein each microlens array section is configured to project an image using light from the one or more light sources (paragraph 39); a collimating assembly (light collimating optical body 21) arranged between the lighting module and the at least one microlens array comprising: one or more collimators corresponding respectively to the one or more light sources, wherein each of the one or more collimators is aligned in a light path from a corresponding one of the one or more light source and the at least one microlens array (see figure 3 and paragraphs 37 and 46-47), wherein one or more light sources comprise a plurality of light sources, and wherein the one or more collimators comprise a plurality of collimators, wherein each light source corresponds to one of the plurality of collimators and one of the microlens array sections wherein each light source of the lighting module aligns with a corresponding collimator and a corresponding microlens array section (see figures 2 and 3 and paragraphs 37 and 46-47) wherein the method comprises: selectively emitting light from the one or more light sources to selectively emit light to one or more of the microlens array sections (paragraph 48).
Gurtl does not teach that the collimating assembly comprises a housing coupled to the lighting module, the housing including a first receptacle or slot configured to receive the one or more collimators in a side loaded manner and a second receptacle or slot configured to receive the at least one microlens array in a side loaded manner.
However, Matsuba teaches (in figure 1-2) providing a housing (lens housing 21) coupled to a lighting module (light source unit 10), the housing including a first receptacle or slot (light shielding mask holding grooves 36) configured to receive the one or more collimators (light shielding mask 24) in a side loaded manner and a second receptacle or slot (fly-eye lens holding grooves 37) configured to receive the at least one microlens array (fly-eye lens 23) in a side loaded manner, in order to allow for interchangeability of the elements (paragraph 46).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Gurtl to include a housing as suggested by Matsuba in order to allow for interchangeability.
As per claim 17, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the one or more light sources comprise a plurality of light sources, and wherein the one or more collimators comprise a plurality of collimators, wherein each light source corresponds to one of the plurality of collimators and one of the microlens array sections (see figures 2 and 3 and paragraphs 37 and 46-47).
As per claim 18, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) selectively emitting light from the plurality of light sources comprises the plurality of light sources emitting light at a same time to the at least one microlens array so as to form a single projected image and so that each microlens array section projects an image that forms a part of the single projected image (see figure 2 and paragraph 39).
As per claim 19, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) selectively emitting light from the plurality of light sources comprises the plurality of light sources respectively emitting light at different times so that the at least one microlens array respectively projects a plurality of images at the different times and so that each microlens array section projects one of the plurality of projected images at the different times (paragraph 39).
As per claim 21, Gurtl in view of Matsuba teaches that wherein the at least one microlens array (micro-exit optics array 41 in Gurtl) is insertable in the second receptacle or slot (fly-eye lens holding grooves 37 from Matsuba) of the housing (lens housing 21 from Matsuba) so as to be removably couplable to the housing (see paragraph 36 in Matsuba).
As per claim 22, Gurtl in view of Matsuba teaches that a plate-like structure or member comprises the plurality of collimators (see figure 3 in Gurtl and figure 1 and 2 in Matsuba).
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) 6-8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gurtl (EP3540294A1, with reference made to provided machine translation) and Matsuba et al. (US Pub. 20090052182, Matsuba) as applied to claims 3 and 17 respectively above and in further view of Sobecki et al. (US Pub. 20190270403, Sobecki).
As per claim 6, Gurtl does not specifically teach that the controller is configured to cause the one or more light sources to selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the at least one microlens array is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section projects an individual frame of the animated projection.
However, Sobecki teaches (in figures 14-16C) controlling one or more light sources (individual LEDs as shown in figure 14) to selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the at least one microlens array (lens array #2) is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section (individual lens on lens array #2) projects an individual frame of the animated projection (see figures and paragraphs 47 and 49).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and driver of Gurtl such that the light sources selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the microlens array is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section projects an individual frame of the animated projection as taught by Sobecki in order to provide a dynamic image.
As per claim 7, Gurtl does not specifically teach that the controller is configured to cause the one or more light sources to selectively emit light in a sequence of variable brightness.
However, Sobecki teaches (in figures 14-16C) controlling one or more light sources (individual LEDs as shown in figure 14) to selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the at least one microlens array (lens array #2) is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section (individual lens on lens array #2) projects an individual frame of the animated projection (see figures and paragraphs 47 and 49) wherein between each frame of the animation the light sources are adjusted in brightness in order to provide a fading transition between frames via pulse width modulation (paragraphs 49 and 51).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and driver of Gurtl such that the light sources selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the microlens array is an animated projection as taught by Sobecki in order to provide a dynamic image.
As per claim 8, Gurtl does not specifically teach that the controller is configured to cause the one or more light source to selectively emit light using pulse-width modulation (PWM) signal to control the one or more light sources.
However, Sobecki teaches (in figures 14-16C) controlling one or more light sources (individual LEDs as shown in figure 14) to selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the at least one microlens array (lens array #2) is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section (individual lens on lens array #2) projects an individual frame of the animated projection (see figures and paragraphs 47 and 49) wherein between each frame of the animation the light sources are adjusted in brightness in order to provide a fading transition between frames via pulse width modulation (paragraphs 49 and 51).
As per claim 20, Gurtl does not specifically teach selectively emitting light from the plurality of light sources comprises the plurality of light sources selectively emitting light in a sequence so that a projected image from the at least one microlens array is an animated projection.
However, Sobecki teaches (in figures 14-16C) controlling one or more light sources (individual LEDs as shown in figure 14) to selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the at least one microlens array (lens array #2) is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section (individual lens on lens array #2) projects an individual frame of the animated projection (see figures and paragraphs 47 and 49).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and driver of Gurtl such that the light sources selectively emit light in a sequence so that projected image from the microlens array is an animated projection, wherein each microlens array section projects an individual frame of the animated projection as taught by Sobecki in order to provide a dynamic image.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gurtl (EP3540294A1, with reference made to provided machine translation) and Matsuba et al. (US Pub. 20090052182, Matsuba) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Gempel (DE102018220295, with reference made to provided machine translation).
As per claim 12, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the one or more light sources comprise one or more light-emitting diodes (paragraph 46).
Gurtl does not specifically teach that the one or more light sources comprise one or more lasers.
However, Gempel teaches that using vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers is a functional equivalent to using LED as light sources as they provide the same function of providing light for projection (paragraphs 31).
Therefore, because these two light sources were art-recognized equivalents before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the light sources as vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers.
As per claim 13, Gurtl teaches (in figures 2-6B) that the one or more light sources comprise one or more light-emitting diodes (paragraph 46).
Gurtl does not specifically teach that the one or more light sources comprise one or more vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs).
However, Gempel teaches that using vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers is a functional equivalent to using LED as light sources as they provide the same function of providing light for projection (paragraphs 31).
Therefore, because these two light sources were art-recognized equivalents before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the light sources as vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-14, and 16-22 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.
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 ALEXANDER P GROSS whose telephone number is (571)272-5660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/ALEXANDER P GROSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights