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 § 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) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heehler (US 2,677,121).
PNG
media_image1.png
572
481
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, Heehler teaches a vehicle lamp assembly, comprising: a first light (39top; figure 3); a second light (39bottom; figure 3); a belt (51; figure 10) that couples the second light (39bottom) to the first light (39top); and an actuator (motor 43) that adjusts a position of the first light (39top) to drive the belt (51) and adjust a position of the second light (39bottom), the actuator (43) driving the belt (51) through the first light (39top.).
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, 4-8, 12-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Menke (US 5,676,447) in view of Heehler (US 2,677,121).
PNG
media_image2.png
522
573
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Menke teaches a vehicle lamp assembly, comprising:
a first light (136left; figure 8 and 9 );
a second light (136right; figure 8-9;); and
a belt (160) that pivotably couples the second light (136left and 136right; figure 8 and 9) to the first light (136left) such that pivoting the first light (136left) pivots the second light (136right) and an actuator (138).
Menke does not explicitly teach the belt being engaged with a first pully fixed to the first light and a second pulley fixed to the second light; and the [actuator] mechanically coupled directly to the first light and configured to pivot the first light about a pivot axis, wherein pivoting of the first light by the actuator drives the belt through the first light to pivot the second light.
Heehler et al. teaches a belt (51) being engaged with a first pully (44) fixed to the first light (39top) and a second pulley (47) fixed to the second light (39bottom); and the actuator (motor 51) mechanically coupled directly to the first light (39top) and configured to pivot the first light (39top) about a pivot axis (see claim 14 of Heehler), wherein pivoting of the first light (39top) by the actuator (43) drives the belt (51) through the first light (39top) to pivot the second light (39bottom).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle lamp assembly of Menke to include a first and second pulley and to have the actuator drive the belt through the first light to pivot the second light as taught by Heehler to provide a structure having improve operating characteristics (see column 1, lines 51-54 of Heehler).
Regarding claim 4, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp assembly further comprising a lamp housing (146, figure 8 and 9) having an interior, the first light (136left) and the second light (136right) disposed within the interior.
Regarding claim 5, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp assembly wherein the first light (136left) is pivotably coupled to the lamp housing (146) and configured to pivot about a first axis relative to the lamp housing (146) wherein the second light (136right) is pivotably coupled to the lamp housing (146) and configured to pivot about a different, second axis relative to the lamp housing (146).
Regarding claim 6, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 5, wherein the actuator (138) that is configured to adjust the position of the first light (136left) by pivoting the first light (136left) about the first axis, the actuator (138) interfacing with the first light (136left) on a first axial side of the first light, the belt (160) interfacing with first light on an opposite, second axial side (see at least figure 8-9).
Regarding claim 7, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp assembly wherein the first light (136left) and the second light (136right) are each pivotably coupled to the lamp housing (140) at two positions.
Regarding claim 8, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp assembly wherein inboard and outboard sides of the first light (136left) and the second light (136right) are pivotably coupled to the lamp housing (146).
Regarding claim 12, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp assembly wherein the first light (136left), the second light (136right), and the belt (160) are constituents of a headlamp.
Regarding claim 13, Menke teaches a vehicle lamp adjustment method (see at least figures 8 and 9), comprising:
pivotably coupling a first light (136left; figure 8 and 9) of a lamp together with a second light of the lamp (136right, figure 8 and 9) using a belt (160; figures 8 and 9)); and pivoting the first light (136left; figure 8 and 9) to pivot the second light (136right; figures 8 and 9)).
Menke does not explicitly teach the belt engaged with a first pulley fixed to the first light and a second pulley fixed to the second light ; and pivoting the first light by actuating the first light directly with an actuator, wherein pivoting of the first light drives the belt through the first light to pivot the second light .
Heehler teaches the belt (51) engaged with a first pulley (44) fixed to the first light (39top) and a second pulley (47) fixed to the second light (39bottom); and pivoting the first light (39top) by actuating the first light (39top) directly with an actuator (motor 43), wherein pivoting of the first light (39top) drives the belt (51) through the first light (43) to pivot the second light (39bottom).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle lamp assembly of Menke to include a first and second pulley and to have the actuator drive the belt through the first light to pivot the second light as taught by Heehler as an alternative way and design choice to pivot the first and second light.
Regarding claim 14, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp adjustment method of claim 13, wherein the first light (136left) and the second light (136right) pivot relative to a lamp housing (housing portions 146; figure 8 and 9).
Regarding claim 15, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp adjustment method of claim 14, wherein the first light (136left) and the second light (136right) are each pivotably coupled to the lamp housing ((housing portions 146)at two positions.
Regarding claim 16, Menke teaches the vehicle lamp adjustment method of claim 14, wherein inboard and outboard sides of the first light (136left) and the second light (136right) are pivotably coupled to the lamp housing (146).
Regarding claim 19, Menke teaches the lamp adjustment method of claim 13, further comprising pivoting the first light with an actuator (138) configured to drive the belt (160) through the first light (136left).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Menke (US 5,676,447) in view of Heehler (US 2,677,121) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Fujino et al. (US 2002/0054496 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the lamp assembly of claim 1 but Menke modified by Heehler does not explicitly teach the vehicle lamp assembly wherein the belt is a toothed belt.
Fujino et al. teaches a toothed belt (see paragraph [0034] where teeth 22a extending in the width direction are formed at the inner peripheral surface of the counter belt 22 is disclosed; see at least figure 5 where teeth 22a are shown).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the belt of Menke to be a toothed belt as that by Fujino et al. as an alternative design choice.
Claim(s) 9-11 and 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Menke (US 5,676,447) in view of Heehler (US 2,677,121) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Takii (US 2015/0016137 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 1, but Menke modified by Heehler is silent about wherein the first light is vertically above the second light.
Takii further teaches wherein the first light (22A; figure 4) is vertically above the second light (22B; figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to position the first light and the second light of Menke to be vertically arranged as taught by Takii to achieve a desired distribution of light, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)(MPEP 2144.04)
Regarding claim 10, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 1, but Menke modified by Heehler does not explicitly teach wherein the first light is a high-beam light, wherein the second light is a low-beam light.
Takii further teaches wherein the first light is a high-beam light (12A), wherein the second light (12B) is a low-beam light.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lamp assembly of Menke to include a high beam and low beam light as an alternative design choice to achieve a desired illumination output.
Regarding claim 11, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 10, but Menke modified by Heehler does not explicitly teach wherein the high-beam light is vertically above the low-beam light.
Takii further teaches wherein the first light is a high-beam light (12A), wherein the second light (12B) is a low-beam light.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to position the high beam light and the low beam light of Menke to be vertically arranged as taught by Takii to achieve a desired distribution of light, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)(MPEP 2144.04)
Regarding claim 17, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 13, but Menke modified by Heehler is silent about wherein the first light is vertically above the second light.
Takii further teaches wherein the first light (22A; figure 4) is vertically above the second light (22B; figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to position the first light and the second light of Menke to be vertically arranged as taught by Takii to achieve a desired distribution of light, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. . In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)(MPEP 2144.04)
Regarding claim 18, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 13, but Menke modified by Heehler does not explicitly teach wherein the first light is a high-beam light, wherein the second light is a low-beam light.
Takii further teaches wherein the first light is a high-beam light (12A), wherein the second light (12B) is a low-beam light.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lamp assembly of Menke to include a high beam and low beam light as an alternative design choice to achieve a desired illumination output.
Regarding claim 20, Menke modified by Heehler teaches the vehicle lamp assembly of claim 13, but Menke modified by Heehler does not explicitly teach wherein the high-beam light is vertically above the low-beam light.
Takii further teaches wherein the first light is a high-beam light (12A), wherein the second light (12B) is a low-beam light.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to position the high beam light and the low beam light of Menke to be vertically arranged as taught by Takii to achieve a desired distribution of light, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)(MPEP 2144.04)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2 and 4-20 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection after consideration of applicant’s arguments and amendment to independent claim 1, 13 and 21.
After consideration of applicant’s arguments of claims 1, 13 and 21, a new reference, Heehler (US 2,677,121), has been found. See rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA MCMILLAN APENTENG whose telephone number is (571)272-5510. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached on 571-270-5046. 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.
/JESSICA M APENTENG/Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875