DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the PCT international search report by the EPO have been considered, but will not be listed on any patent resulting from this application because they were not provided on a separate list in compliance with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1). In order to have the references printed on such resulting patent, a separate listing, preferably on a PTO/SB/08 form, must be filed within the set period for reply to this Office action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the plurality of light elements arranged in several rows on the carrier wherein the rows are arranged parallel and offset to one another in the longitudinal direction must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 5-11 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 5 recites the broad recitation several, and the claim also recites in particular two which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 6 recites an illumination arm, and the claim also recites preferably comprising a plurality of illumination arms. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by the latter language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lamarre (U.S. Patent No. 7164462). Lamarre teaches a device for generating illumination of an object, characterised in that the device comprises at least one strip-shaped projection surface (20), wherein the device comprises at least one light element (10) for illuminating the projection surface (col. 3, lines 23-25 “A projector 10 is placed behind a rear-projection screen 16 and an image is projected onto the rear-projection screen 16 from behind.”), wherein the projection surface is movably arranged (see fig. 5 and col. 6, lines 45-54), wherein the device comprises at least one movement device (18) for moving the projection surface (col. 6, lines 46-47, “wherein the rear-projection screen 16 and projector 10 are on a trolley 18”), wherein the device comprises a control unit, and wherein the control unit is designed to control the light element synchronously with a movement of the projection surface (col. 6, lines 53-54, “The screen 16 and projector 10 may be on the same trolley”. The light and projection surface are controlled to move synchronously).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Douglas (U.S. Patent No. 2962547). Douglas teaches a device for generating illumination of an object, characterised in that the device comprises at least one strip-shaped projection surface (62), wherein the device comprises at least one light element (62, 76) for illuminating the projection surface (see figs. 11-12), wherein the projection surface is movably arranged (col. 2, lines 47-55, “A screen suitable to receive such projected images may be sufficiently large to accommodate them or, more conveniently, the screen itself may be arranged to move synchronously with the area of the projected image.”), wherein the device comprises at least one movement device (70) for moving the projection surface (col. 9, lines 14-16, “For this purpose screen 62 is suspended from a motor-driven dolly 70 which runs on tracks 71.”), wherein the device comprises a control unit (73, 73A), and wherein the control unit is designed to control the light element synchronously with a movement of the projection surface (col. 6, lines 53-54, “By means of servomechanism control equipment 73 it is possible in accordance with the invention to control the movements of the projector 63, the loudspeaker 65 and the screen 62 together with microphone 72 automatically to follow movement of camera 68, in the manner described in connection with Figs. 6 and 7, for example.”)
Regarding claim 2, the device has a suspension, wherein the projection surface is suspended by means of the suspension (col. 9, lines 14-16, “For this purpose screen 62 is suspended from a motor-driven dolly 70 which runs on tracks 71.”), wherein the at least one direction of movement is designed to move the projection surface translationally and/or rotationally (col. 9, lines 12-14, “In this case, the stage 67 might be of considerable length and screen 62 would be arranged to move along behind it.”)
Regarding claims 13-14, col. 9, lines 49-64 discussed methods for using the device of claims 1-2.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by House (U.S. Patent No. 11892751). House has an effective filing date of September 18, 2020 based in provisional application 63/080326.
House teaches a device (108) for generating illumination of an object (102), characterised in that the device comprises at least one strip-shaped projection surface (fig. 1, screen 112), wherein the device comprises at least one light element (col. 11 lines 18-20, “The movable display 108 may be any type of display such as, but not limited to, LED, OLED,”) for illuminating the projection surface, wherein the projection surface is movably arranged (col. 11, lines 2-5, “a rotating arm assembly includes a movable display 108 supported by a movable arm 110 that is configured to rotate around the photographic subject or product.”), wherein the device comprises at least one movement device (110/120) for moving the projection surface, wherein the device comprises a control unit (114), and wherein the control unit is designed to control the light element synchronously with a movement of the projection surface (col 14, lines 49-58).
Regarding claim 2, fig. 1 depicts that the device 108 is suspended from 110 and 130.
Regarding claim 3, a plurality of light elements (col. 11, lines 5-20, “the movable display 108 contains at least two vertical columns of pixels” and “The movable display 108 may be any type of display such as, but not limited to, LED, OLED”), the light elements (LEDs) being arranged on a carrier (112), the light elements being individually controllable ( col 11, lines 5-8 “The movable display 108 includes a screen 112 configured to emit light of any color and any pattern, and is configured to receive a display output signal from one or more computers 114.”), wherein the carrier (108) is connected to the projection surface (112), so that the carrier) is also movably arranged together with the projection surface (108 and 112 are moved together as both are suspended from 110).
Regarding claim 4, House teaches that the movable display contains at least two vertical columns of pixels (col 11, line 11). This would mean at least two columns of LEDs/light elements in a row on the carrier.
Regarding claims 13-16, col. 5, lines 14-16 and col. 19, lines 36-55 teach methods for using the apparatus.
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) 3-4, 6-7, 10, 15-16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Douglas (U.S. Patent No. 2962547) in view of Swindord (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0077564). Douglas teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for a plurality of light elements arranged on a carrier. Swindord teaches a plurality of light elements 20 arranged on a carrier. The applicant is directed to review fig. 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Swindword for the purpose of increasing size and portability.
Regarding claim 4, fig. 2 of Swindword shows the light elements are in at least one row.
Regarding claim 6, the projection surface (11) with an associated carrier (12) forms an illumination arm. A plurality of arms is being interpreted as optional.
Regarding claim 7, Douglas teaches in col. 2, lines 51-53 that the projection surface is curved at least in sections.
Regarding claim 10, Douglas teaches that it was known to at least partially span the object. The applicant is directed to review figs. 4-5 for example.
Regarding claims 15-16 and 18-19, col. 9, lines 49-64 of Douglass discusses methods for using the device of claims 1-2.
Claim(s) 5 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Douglas (U.S. Patent No. 2962547) in view of Swindord (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0077564) and further in view of Tsuchiya (JPH0553002U). Douglas as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for that the plurality of light elements are arranged wherein the rows are arranged parallel and offset to one another in the longitudinal direction. Tsuchiya teaches in fig. 7 that it was known to offset the rows. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Tsuchiya for the purpose of reducing interference.
Regarding claim 17, col. 9, lines 49-64 of Douglas discusses methods for using the device of claims 1-2.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Douglas (U.S. Patent No. 2962547) in view of Swindord (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0077564) and further in view of Fournier (U.S. Publication No. 2016/0337564). Douglas as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for a projection surface and/or the illumination arm has sections with different degrees of diffusion. Fournier teaches in figs. 1A-1B, the abstract and paragraphs 8, 31 and 35 that it was known to use sections with different degrees of diffusion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Fournier for the purpose of adjusting the level of diffusion based on detected characteristics of the field of view.
Claim(s) 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Douglas (U.S. Patent No. 2962547) in view of Swindord (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0077564) and further in view of Way (U.S. Publication No. 2008/0118178). Douglas as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for wherein a light shaft is formed between the light element and the associated section on the projection surface in order to avoid cross-talk to neighbouring sections. Way teaches in fig. 1 and paragraphs 21-23 that it was known to provide a light shaft is formed between the light element and the associated section on the projection surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Way for the purpose of preventing cross talk.
Regarding claim 20, col. 9, lines 49-64 of Douglas discusses methods for using the device of claims 1-2.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Douglas (U.S. Patent No. 2962547) in view of Swindord (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0077564) and further in view of Flessas (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0394431). Douglas as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for the projection surface and/or the illumination arm are designed to be flexible so that their curvature can be changed. Flessas teaches in paras. 93-94 and fig. 9 that it was known to provide a flexible projection surface so a curvature can be changed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Flessas for the purpose of providing a unique and dynamic experience that can be easily changed from one form to another in a relatively quick manner. Regarding claim 9, fig. 11 of Flessas shows that the carrier for the projection surface may be foldable.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over House (U.S. Patent No. 11892751) in view of Joffer (U.S. Patent No. 8130175). House teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for that the plurality of light elements are arranged wherein the rows are arranged parallel and offset to one another in the longitudinal direction. Joffer teaches in figures 1 and 7 that it was known to arrange the plurality of light elements wherein the rows are arranged parallel and offset to one another in the longitudinal direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Joffer for the purpose of tighter pixel spacing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Coughenour (U.S. Patent No. 10924423) teaches adjusting diffusion to light based on type of photography.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2122. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852