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. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priorities based on an application JP 2022-201164 filed in Japan Patent Office (JPO) on December 16, 2022 and an application JP 2023-191969 filed in Japan Patent Office (JPO) on November 10, 2023 and receipt of certified copies thereof. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on December 13, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.— The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his inventi on. Claims 3, 5, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites the feature “at least some of the plurality of first light sources” in lines 2-3. It is unclear whether the feature of claim 3 relates back to “at least some of the plurality of first light sources” in lines 42-43 of the base claim 1 or something else. For the examination purpose, the feature of claim 3 is interpreted to as --at least another some of the plurality of first light sources--. Claim 5 recites the feature “ at least some of the plurality of first light sources” in lines 10-11. It is unclear whether the feature of claim 5 relates back to “at least some of the plurality of first light sources” in lines 42-43 of the base claim 1 or something else. For the examination purpose, the feature of claim 5 is interpreted to as --at least another some of the plurality of first light sources--. Claims 8 and 9 are rejected due to their dependency. 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 of this title, 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 13, 14 and 16 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2007/0008740 in view of Beerwerth et al. US 2017/0213319. Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches a light emitting module (e.g., Fig. 4, [38]-[58]), comprising: a plurality of light sources (e.g., R LEDS, , G LEDs, B LEDs, Fig. 4) arranged in a first direction (e.g., vertical direction along which 36 and/or 38 are disposed, Fig. 4, [53]) and a second direction (e.g., horizontal direction along which 32 and/or 34 are disposed, Fig. 4, [53]) in a top view, wherein the second direction is orthogonal to the first direction (e.g., Fig. 4, [53]), the plurality of light sources are arranged in a plurality of light source arrays (e.g., 36, 38 and light source arrays arranged parallel to 36 and/or 38, each array including two B LEDs, four G LEDs and two R LEDs, Fig. 4) and include a plurality of first light sources (e.g., G LEDs, Fig. 4) configured to emit light having a first peak wavelength (e.g., first peak wavelength of green light, [38]), and a plurality of third light sources (e.g., R LEDs, Fig. 4) configured to emit light having a third peak wavelength (e.g., third peak wavelength of red light, [38]) longer than the first peak wavelength, in each of the light source arrays, two or more first light sources (e.g., four G LEDs, Fig. 4) and one or more third light sources (e.g., two R LEDs, Fig. 4) are arranged in the first direction, a number of the plurality of first light sources included in the plurality of light sources is greater than a number of the plurality of third light sources included in the plurality of light sources (e.g., Fig. 4), and at least some of the plurality of first light sources are disposed at positions adjacent to the plurality of third light sources in the first direction and the second direction (e.g., Fig. 4). Lee does not explicitly teach (i) an output per unit power of the plurality of third light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the plurality of first light sources; and (ii) the first light sources and third light sources are connected in series. Regarding (i), Lee recognizes that the third light sources (R LEDs) emit light having a third peak wavelength longer than the first peak wavelength of the first light sources (G LEDs) and the number of the first light sources (G LEDs) is greater than a number of the third light sources (R LEDs), which pertains to the relationship between the third light sources and first light sources in which an output per unit power of the third light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the first light sources, disclosed in Applicant’s original disclosure (e.g., [23]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the module of Lee may perform the claimed relationship of the output per unit power. Regarding (ii), Beerwerth teaches the light sources are connected in series (e.g., [53]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the module of Lee to include the light sources are connected in series as suggested by Beerwerth for the purpose of controlling each of the light source arrays of the module, thereby operating the module as desired for example (e.g., Beerwerth , [53]). In this case, Lee in view of Beerwerth thus teaches the first light sources and third light sources are connected in series. Regarding claim 14, Lee in view of Beerwerth teaches the light emitting module according to claim 13, wherein some light sources (e.g., Lee , R LEDs, Fig. 4), among light sources arranged in the second direction (e.g., Lee , horizontal direction along which 32 and/or 34 are disposed, Fig. 4), are arranged such that positions in the first direction (e.g., Lee , vertical direction along which 36 and/or 38 are disposed, Fig. 4) of the some light sources are the same in the top view. Regarding claim 16, Lee in view of Beerwerth teaches the light emitting module according to claim 13, wherein the plurality of light sources are disposed at grid points along the first direction and the second direction in the top view (e.g., Lee , grid points at which the light sources (G LEDs, R LEDs) are disposed, Fig. 4). Claims 13 and 17 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. US 4,500,914 in view of Beerwerth et al. US 2017/0213319. Regarding claim 13, Watanabe teaches a light emitting module (e.g., Fig. 4, col. 3, line 45 to col. 7, line 19), comprising: a plurality of light sources (e.g., R elements, G elements, B elements, Fig. 4) arranged in a first direction (e.g., vertical direction, Fig. 4) and a second direction (e.g., horizontal direction, Fig. 4) in a top view, wherein the second direction is orthogonal to the first direction (e.g., Fig. 4), the plurality of light sources are arranged in a plurality of light source arrays (e.g., light source arrays arranged in the vertical direction, each array including two B elements, four G elements and two R elements, Fig. 4) and include a plurality of first light sources (e.g., G elements, Fig. 4) configured to emit light having a first peak wavelength (e.g., first peak wavelength of green light), and a plurality of third light sources (e.g., R elements, Fig. 4) configured to emit light having a third peak wavelength (e.g., third peak wavelength of red light) longer than the first peak wavelength, in each of the light source arrays, two or more first light sources (e.g., four G elements, Fig. 4) and one or more third light sources (e.g., two R elements, Fig. 4) are arranged in the first direction, a number of the plurality of first light sources included in the plurality of light sources is greater than a number of the plurality of third light sources included in the plurality of light sources (e.g., Fig. 4), and at least some of the plurality of first light sources are disposed at positions adjacent to the plurality of third light sources in the first direction and the second direction (e.g., Fig. 4). Watanabe does not explicitly teach (i) an output per unit power of the plurality of third light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the plurality of first light sources; and (ii) the first light sources and third light sources are connected in series. Regarding (i), Watanabe recognizes that the third light sources (R elements) emit light having a third peak wavelength longer than the first peak wavelength of the first light sources (G elements ) and the number of the first light sources (G elements) is greater than a number of the third light sources (R elements), which pertains to the relationship between the third light sources and first light sources in which an output per unit power of the third light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the first light sources, disclosed in Applicant’s original disclosure (e.g., [23]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the module of Watanabe may perform the claimed relationship of the output per unit power. Regarding (ii), Beerwerth teaches the light sources are connected in series (e.g., [53]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the module of Watanabe to include the light sources are connected in series as suggested by Beerwerth for the purpose of controlling each of the light source arrays of the module, thereby operating the module as desired for example (e.g., Beerwerth , [53]). In this case, Watanabe in view of Beerwerth thus teaches the first light sources and third light sources are connected in series. Regarding claim 17, Watanabe in view of Beerwerth teaches the light emitting module according to claim 13, further comprising a substrate (e.g., Watanabe, col. 3, lines 45-49) on which the plurality of light sources are disposed, wherein the substrate has a placement region (e.g., Watanabe; imaginary placement region including the elements in an 8 x 8 matrix array, an outer shape of which is defined by sides parallel to the first direction (vertical direction) and sides parallel to the second direction (horizontal direction); Fig. 4) where the plurality of light sources are arranged, an outer shape of the placement region is defined by sides parallel to the first direction and sides parallel to the second direction, and is a smallest rectangle including all of the plurality of light sources (see the discussion regarding the placement region above), and some of the plurality of third light sources are disposed on a diagonal line of the placement region (e.g., Fig. 4). Beerwerth further teaches a wiring substrate on which the plurality of light sources are disposed via flip chip manner (e.g., [44]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the module of Watanabe to include a wiring substrate on which the plurality of light sources are disposed as suggested by Beerwerth for the purpose of reducing the number of contacts to the light elements, thereby enhancing the reliability and performance of the module for example. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 are allowed at this time, pending updated search before the Examiner's next response, because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitation of the base claim 1 that recites “the plurality of light sources are arranged in a plurality of light source arrays and include a plurality of first light sources configured to emit light having a first peak wavelength, a plurality of second light sources configured to emit light having a second peak wavelength longer than the first peak wavelength, and a plurality of third light sources configured to emit light having a third peak wavelength longer than the second peak wavelength, in each of the light source arrays, two or more first light sources, two or more second light sources, and one or more third light sources are arranged in the first direction and connected in series, a number of the plurality of first light sources included in the plurality of light sources is greater than a number of the plurality of second light sources included in the plurality of light sources, the number of the plurality of second light sources included in the plurality of light sources is greater than a number of the plurality of third light sources included in the plurality of light sources, an output per unit power of the plurality of third light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the plurality of second light sources, the output per unit power of the plurality of second light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the plurality of first light sources, and at least some of the plurality of first light sources or at least some of the plurality of second light sources are disposed at positions adjacent to the plurality of third light sources in the first direction and the second direction” in combination with other elements of the base claim 1. Claims 10-12 are allowed at this time, pending updated search before the Examiner's next response, because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitation of the base claim 10 that recites “the plurality of light sources are arranged in a plurality of light source arrays and include a plurality of first light sources configured to emit light having a first peak wavelength, a plurality of second light sources configured to emit light having a second peak wavelength longer than the first peak wavelength, and a plurality of third light sources configured to emit light having a third peak wavelength longer than the second peak wavelength, in each of the light source arrays, two or more first light sources, two or more second light sources, and one or more third light sources are arranged in the first direction and connected in series, a number of the plurality of first light sources included in the plurality of light sources is greater than a number of the plurality of second light sources included in the plurality of light sources, the number of the plurality of second light sources included in the plurality of light sources is greater than a number of the plurality of third light sources included in the plurality of light sources, an output per unit power of the plurality of third light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the plurality of second light sources, the output per unit power of the plurality of second light sources is higher than an output per unit power of the plurality of first light sources, at least some of the plurality of first light sources or at least some of the plurality of second light sources are disposed at positions adjacent to the plurality of third light sources in the first direction and the second direction, and some light sources, among light sources arranged in the second direction, are arranged such that positions in the first direction of the some light sources are the same in the top view” in combination with other elements of the base claim 10. Claim 15 is 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 . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bo Bin Jang whose telephone number is (571) 270-0271. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) OR 571-272-1000. /BO B JANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 March 13, 2026