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 § 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 invention.
Claims 3-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “…the thermal conductivity of the substrate and the thermal conductivity of the spacer are both equal to or higher than a thermal conductivity of phosphor bronze”. However, “phosphor bronze” does not have a single standard conductivity- there are multiple alloys with different k-values. Thus, the claim is indefinite since it does not identify which phosphor bronze alloy. For the purpose of examination “…the thermal conductivity of the substrate and the thermal conductivity of the spacer are both equal to or higher than a thermal conductivity of phosphor bronze” is interpretated as “…the thermal conductivity of the substrate and the thermal conductivity of the spacer are both equal to or higher than a thermal conductivity of a typical phosphor bronze material used in electronic components”.
Claim 4 recites “…adjusting temperature within the housing to be higher than outside temperature”. It is unclear if the “outside temperature” is device’s external surface temperature or ambient air temperature or local enclosure environment temperature. For the purpose of examination, “…adjusting temperature within the housing to be higher than outside temperature” is interpretated as “…adjusting temperature within the housing to be higher than ambient temperature outside the device during operation”.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for their dependency of claim 4.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy (US 20170059400 A1) in view of Takaku (JP 2009129709 A).
Re: independent Claim 1, Murphy discloses LED light source device comprising:
a light emitting element that emits the light (Murphy, Fig. 3, LED chips 140 that emit light);
a substrate on which the light emitting element is mounted (Murphy, Fig. 3, substrate 130 on which LED chips 140 is mounted);
a spacer that supports the substrate (Murphy, Fig. 3, heat sink 115 including an aluminum block 120 that support the substrate 130, thus heatsink 115/aluminum block 120 corresponds to spacer);
a housing that accommodates the light emitting element, the substrate, and the spacer (Murphy, in Figs. 5-11 and ¶ [0061] – [0064], teaches a housing in the form of a reflector 180 that defines a reflector chamber 225. Murphy teaches that the LED substrate 130 carrying LED chips 140 is mounted to the heat sink 115 including the aluminum block 120, and that the reflector 180 is mounted over and around this LED/heat sink assembly. Thus, the reflector 180/reflector chamber 225 accommodates the light emitting elements 140, substrate 130, and the spacer/heat sink 155/120);
and a lid that seals the housing (Murphy teaches, in Fig. 7 and ¶¶ [0062] – [0063], that the LEDs 140 are hermetically sealed from the environment by a fixed inner window 240, and the reflector 180 carries the permanently fixed inner window 240 which allows LED light to pass while providing the hermetic seal-i.e., the window 240 functions as the claimed lid that seals the housing (reflector chamber 225) provides hermetic seal to protect the LEDs, i.e., 240 is a “lid” that seals the housing),
wherein the light emitting element includes an LED (Fig. 3 and ¶ [0056], LED chips 140 includes LEDs),
wherein the spacer is disposed so as to be in contact with at least one of the housing or the lid (Murphy teaches, in ¶ [0062], reflector 180 is attached directly to the aluminum block 120 of the heat sink 115 (spacer) by screws 185, and an O-ring 190 is placed directly between the interfaces of reflector 180 and aluminum block 120 of heat sink 115, providing a hermetic seal - thereby teaching the spacer (heat sink 115/aluminum block 120) is disposed in contact with the housing (reflector 180)).
Murphy is silent regarding,
wherein a thermal conductivity of the substrate and a thermal conductivity of the spacer are higher than both of a thermal conductivity of the housing and a thermal conductivity of the lid.
However, Takaku teaches wherein a thermal conductivity of the substrate and a thermal conductivity of the spacer are higher than both of a thermal conductivity of the housing and a thermal conductivity of the lid (Takaku teaches, in Fig. 8 and related description, selecting materials of lamp/light source enclosure components to achieve desired thermal performance including teaching a case 5 (housing) formed of stainless steel having thermal conductivity of 25 W/(m-k), and further teaches, in Fig. 3 and related description, high thermal conductivity heat-dissipation/support members such as heat radiating plate 41 and heat radiating block 42 formed of copper having thermal conductivity of 380 W/(m-k). With respect to the claimed thermal conductivity relationship, Takaku’s heat radiating plate 41 is relied upon as being analogous in function to Murphy’s substrate (LED substrate 130) because both are thermally conductive members positioned at/near the light source and configured to spread/conduct heat from the light emitting element. Takaku’s heat radiating block 42 is relied upon as being analogous in function to Murphy’s spacer/support structure (heat sink 115/aluminum block 120) because both are thermally conductive support members that receive heat from the substrate-level member and provide a primary heat conduction path away from the light emitting element).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select materials for Murphy’s substrate 130 and spacer/support structure 115/120 to have thermal conductivities higher than the materials selected for Murphy’s housing (e.g., reflector 180) and lid (e.g., window 240), as suggested by Takaku’s teaching of using very high thermal conductivity heat-dissipating members (plate 41 and block 42) in combination with lower thermal conductivity enclosure members (case 5), in order to improve heat dissipation from the LEDs and thereby reduce temperature-related instability during operation.
Examiner notes that “LED light source device that emits light used to measure absorbance of a sample” is a statement to intended use and does not further limit the claimed LED light source device. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.
Re: Claim 2, Murphy and Takaku disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Takaku further teaches
wherein the thermal conductivity of the housing and the thermal conductivity of the lid are both 10 W/(m-k) or more and 50 W/(m-k) or less (Takaku teaches, in Fig 1-2, and Best-mode description, a light source device including a case 5 (housing) and a lens holding plate 8 (lid/cover) that closes the upper end of the case 5. Takaku further teaches the case 5 is made of stainless steel having thermal conductivity of 25 W/(m-k), which is within the claimed 10-50 W/(m-k) range. Although Murphy does not expressly recite the numerical thermal-conductivity range of claim 2, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the material of Murphy’s housing and lid (e.g., reflector (180) and the member closing/sealing the housing opening) to have a thermal conductivity within the claimed 10-50 W/(m-K) range, as taught by Takaku’s stainless steel case 5 (25 W/(m-k) and corresponding closure structure (lens holding plate 8), in order to achieve predictable and controlled heat transfer/thermal stability of the LED light source device during operation while maintaining a structurally robust sealed enclosure).
Re: Claim 3, Murphy and Takaku disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Takaku further teaches
wherein the thermal conductivity of the substrate and the thermal conductivity of the spacer are both equal to or higher than a thermal conductivity of phosphor bronze (Takaku teaches, in Fig. 2 and related description, forming heat-dissipation/support members, including a heat radiating plate 41 and a heat radiating block 42), of copper having thermal conductivity of 380 W/(m-k), which is greater than the thermal conductivity of phosphor bronze (about 63 W(m-K)). Accordingly, it would have been, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the material of Murphy’s substate and spacer (e.g., the LED substrate and the heat-sink/support body) to have thermal conductivities equal to or higher than phosphor bronze, such as by using copper or other comparably high-thermal-conductivity materials as taught by Takaku, in order to improve heat dissipation and reduced-temperature related light output drift from the LED light source used in absorbance measurement.
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy (US 20170059400 A1) in view of Takaku (JP 2009129709 A) further in view of Adachi (US20110110822 A1).
Re: Claim 4, Murphy and Takaku disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Murphy and Takaku are silent regarding,
wherein the housing includes a temperature adjustment mechanism capable of adjusting temperature within the housing to be higher than outside temperature.
However, Adachi teaches wherein the housing includes a temperature adjustment mechanism capable of adjusting temperature within the housing to be higher than outside temperature (Adachi teaches, in Fig. 2 and ¶ [0025], an automatic analysis device including a thermostatic chamber 18 holding a constant temperature fluid 17, wherein the constant temperature fluid 17 is brought in and circulated and is controlled accurately (e.g., 37C) to maintain the temperature of the reaction solution, and further teaches a constant temperature fluid control part configured to control the temperature (and flow rate) of the constant temperature fluid. Accordingly, Adachi teaches a temperature adjustment mechanism for a chamber/housing (thermostatic chamber 18) capable of adjusting the temperature within the chamber using controlled constant temperature fluid 17.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Adachi’s temperature control mechanism into Murphy’s sealed LED housing (reflector 180/chamber 225) in order to adjust/maintain the temperature within the housing to a controlled setpoint (including a setpoint above outside/ambient temperature as needed for reaction temperature operation), thereby improving LED stability and absorbance measurement accuracy.
Re: Claim 5, Murphy, Takaku and Adachi disclose all the limitations of claim 4 on which this claim depends.
Adachi further teaches,
wherein the temperature adjustment mechanism includes at least one of: a mechanism that circulates a constant temperature liquid within the housing, or a heater that heats the housing (As set forth with respect to claim 4, Adachi teaches an automatic analysis device including a thermostatic chamber 18 holding constant temperature fluid 17, wherein the constant temperature fluid 17 is brought in and circulated and is controlled accurately (e.g., 37C) to maintain the temperature of the reaction solution, and further teaches a constant temperature fluid control part configured to control the temperature (and flow rate) of the constant temperature fluid. Accordingly, Adachi teaches the claimed “mechanism that circulates a constant temperature liquid within the housing” (constant temperature fluid 17 circulated in thermostatic chamber 18). Therefore, Hoshizaki teaches the temperature adjustment mechanism that includes “a mechanism that circulates a constant temperature liquid within the housing”).
Re: Claim 6, Murphy, Takaku and Adachi disclose all the limitations of claim 4 on which this claim depends.
Adachi further teaches,
the temperature adjustment mechanism includes a mechanism that circulates a constant temperature liquid within the housing, and wherein the temperature adjustment mechanism is configured such that a decrease of a flow rate of the constant temperature liquid lowers the temperature within the housing (Adachi teaches the claimed constant temperature liquid circulation mechanism (constant temperature fluid 17 circulated in thermostatic chamber 18) and teaches flow-rate control of that constant temperature liquid 17 is brought in and circulated so that the measurement region is immersed in the circulating constant temperature fluid. Adachi further teaches providing a constant temperature fluid control part configurated to control both the temperature and the flow rate of the constant temperature fluid 17. Accordingly, Adachi teaches the claimed constant temperature liquid circuit mechanism (constant temperature fluid 17 circulated in thermostatic chamber 18) and teaches flow-rate control of that constant temperature liquid. Further, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Adachi’s controlled circulation of constant temperature fluid 17 (with controlled flow rate) as the temperature adjustment mechanism for Murphy’s sealed LED light source housing, in order to stabilize the LED operating temperature).
Re: Claim 7, Murphy, Takaku and Adachi disclose all the limitations of claim 4 on which this claim depends.
Adachi further teaches,
wherein the temperature adjustment mechanism adjusts the temperature within the housing using a constant temperature liquid used to maintain temperature of a constant temperature reservoir included in an automatic analysis device to which the LED light source device supplies the light (Adachi teaches, in Figs. 1-2, an automatic analysis device including a measurement unit 13 having a light emission unit 15 as a light source for radiating light 16 to a reaction solution 7 in a cell 8, and a light receiving element 21 for receiving light having passed the reaction solution. Adachi further teaches that the cell 8 is immersed in a constant temperature fluid 17 held in a thermostatic chamber 18 so that the reaction solution temperature is kept constant, i.e., the thermostatic chamber 18 functions as a constant temperature reservoir for the constant temperature liquid 17).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Murphy’s LED light source device (housing reflector 180/chamber 225) to employ Adachi’s constant temperature liquid 17 from the automatic analyzer’s constant temperature reservoir (thermostatic chamber 18) as the temperature adjustment medium for adjusting the temperature within the LED light source housing, in order to maintain stable LED operating temperature and reduce temperature-related output drift during absorbance measurement, thereby improving measurement stability and accuracy (Adachi, ¶ [0009]).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy (US 20170059400 A1) in view of Takaku (JP 2009129709 A) further in view of Thomas (US 20190056076 A1).
Re: Claim 8, Murphy and Takaku disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Murphy further teaches
further comprising an optical path that allows the light emitted from the light emitting element to pass through, wherein the optical path has an opening through which the light passes (Murphy teaches, in ¶ [0064], an optical output structure in which light emitted from the LEDs (e.g., LED chip 140) passes outward through the housing via the window region (e.g., fixed inner window 240 and outer window 230), thereby providing an optical path having an opening through which the emitted light passes).
Murphy and Takaku are silent regarding,
wherein an internal space of the housing and outside air of the LED light source device are allowed to be ventilated through the opening.
However, Thomas teaches wherein an internal space of the housing and outside air of the LED light source device are allowed to be ventilated through the opening (Thomas teaches, in Figs. 1-3 and ¶ [0029], a light fixture 10 having a housing 20 and a lens 35 secured to the housing, where the lens provides the light-output region for the light emitted from the internal LED light engine. Thomas further teaches, in ¶ [0030], that the main body 45 of the housing may include a vent to reduce fogging of the lens 35, i.e., an opening that allows air exchange between the internal space of the housing and outside air).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the vented optical/lens-region airflow arrangement of Thomas into the LED light source housing arrangement of Murphy and Takaku in order to permit ventilation and reduce fogging while maintaining an optical output opening, since Murphy already recognized airflow through the housing , and Thomas expressly teaches venting near the light-output lens to improve operation/reliability (Thomas, ¶ [0030]).
Re: Claim 9, Murphy, Takaku and Thomas disclose all the limitations of claim 8 on which this claim depends.
Thomas further teaches,
the lid has a hole that allows a wiring for supplying power to the light emitting element to pass through (Thomas teaches, in ¶¶ [0029]- [0031], a light fixture 10 including a housing 20 with an internal power supply 25, wherein a rear cover 65 (i.e., a lid/cover portion) includes an opening 69 that allows for passage of electrical leads, specifically main power leads 85 and a ground lead 90, for connection to the power supply 25. Accordingly, Thomas teaches a lid/cover (rear cover 65) having a hole/opening (69) through which wiring (85, 90) passes through), and
wherein a size of an opening of the hole is smaller than a size of the opening of the optical path (Murphy’s opening of the optical path is the opening through which emitted light passes outward from the device (e.g., through the window region including exit window 230 and fixed inner window 240). Thomas teaches the wiring hole is opening 69 that allows only electrical leads 85, 90 to pass through. Although Murphy and Thomas do not expressly state that the opening of the hole is smaller than the optical path opening, it would have been an obvious matter of routine engineering design to dimension the wiring pass-through opening 69 to be smaller than the optical-path opening (Murphy window opening) because (a) the wiring hole need only accommodate thin electrical leads and therefore can be minimized, while (b) the optical-path opening must provide sufficient aperture for emission of the LED light).
Re: Claim 10, Murphy and Takaku disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Both Murphy and Takaku are silent regarding,
wherein a volume of the spacer is smaller than both of a volume of the housing and a volume of the lid.
However, Thomas teaches wherein a volume of the spacer is smaller than both of a volume of the housing and a volume of the lid (Thomas teaches, in Figs. 11-12 and ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], a light fixture 110 having a housing 120 and a front lens cover 135 (cover/lid), and further teaches a spacer-like thermal support member in the form of a heat transfer element 160 (e.g., thermal pad 161) positioned between the rear surface of the circuit board 150 and the primary mounting surface 196 of the housing 120. Thomas further teaches, in ¶ [0039], the circuit board 150 and heat transfer element 160 have an outer periphery less than inner periphery of the main body portion 145 of the housing 120; and also, as shown in Fig. 12, lens cover 135 has dimension as large as the main body portion 145, evidencing that the spacer/heat transfer element is dimensioned substantially smaller than the housing and the lens cover assembly).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to size the spacer that supports the substrate to have a volume smaller than the housing and lid, as taught by Thomas, because the spacer is an internal support/thermal interface member and minimizing its volume is a predictable design choice that reduces material usage and allows compact packaging while still supporting the substrate within the larger enclosing housing/lid.
Prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to current application disclosure.
Ruan (CN 203521476 U) and Katou (US 20220136978 A1) disclose light emitting device used in inspection target.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIPANA ADHIKARI DAWADI whose telephone number is (571)272-4149. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:30am-7:30pm.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571) 272-2339. 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.
/BIPANA ADHIKARI DAWADI/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898