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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of the species of figure 4 in the reply filed on 05/04/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species of figure 4 should be examined with the species of figures 6-7 is found persuasive. Claims 7-9 and 16-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 10 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0146802, hereafter referred to as ‘Gao ‘802’. Regarding claim 1, Gao ‘802 teaches an optical system (figures 1-18) comprising: a light source 21 configured to emit one or more substantially parallel light beams (para. #’s 90-99); a zoom lens module (1, 7, 12-1, 12-2, 12-3, 73, 77, see figures 2-4 and 14) optically coupled to the light source 21 (figures 2-4 and 14), the zoom lens module comprising: a converging lens (12-3, 73), configured to receive the one or more substantially parallel light beams emitted by the light source and to emit a converging light beam (figures 2-4 and 14 and para. #’s 90-99 and 121-138); and a tubular light spill shield 78 having a back end adjacent to a front surface of the converging lens (fig. 14) and a front end comprising an aperture (fig. 14), the aperture located adjacent to a focus of the converging lens (fig. 14, para. #’s 121-138), the tubular light spill shield configured to pass the converging light beam (para. #’s 121-138), wherein the converging lens and the tubular light spill shield are fixedly coupled to the zoom lens module (figure 14); and a positive power optical device (14-1, 75) configured to receive the converging light beam and to emit an output light beam from the optical system (figures 2-4 and 14 and para. #’s 90-99 and 121-138), wherein the light source and the positive power optical device are mounted in fixed positions in the optical system (para. #’s 90-138) and the zoom lens module is configured to move along an optical axis of the optical system between the light source and the positive power optical device (para. #’s 105-107).
Regarding claim 10, Gao ‘802 teaches a luminaire (figures 1-18) comprising: a head 2 (fig. 1) comprising: a light source 21, configured to emit one or more substantially parallel light beams (para. #’s 90-99 and 121-138); a zoom lens module (1, 7, 12-1, 12-2, 12-3, 73) optically coupled to the light source 21 (figures 2-4 and 14), the zoom lens module comprising: the zoom lens module comprising: a converging lens (12-3, 73), configured to receive the one or more substantially parallel light beams emitted by the light source and to emit a converging light beam (figures 2-4 and 14 and para. #’s 90-99 and 121-138); and a tubular light spill shield 78 having a back end adjacent to a front surface of the converging lens (fig. 14) and a front end comprising an aperture (fig. 14), the aperture located adjacent to a focus of the converging lens (fig. 14, para. #’s 121-138), the tubular light spill shield configured to pass the converging light beam (para. #’s 121-138), wherein the converging lens and the tubular light spill shield are fixedly coupled to the zoom lens module (figure 14); and a positive power optical device (14-1, 75) configured to receive the converging light beam and to emit an output light beam from the optical system (figures 2-4 and 14 and para. #’s 90-99 and 121-138), wherein the light source and the positive power optical device are mounted in fixed positions in the optical system (para. #’s 90-138) and the zoom lens module is configured to move along an optical axis of the optical system between the light source and the positive power optical device (para. #’s 105-107); and power circuits configured to provide electrical power to electrical circuits of the head 2 (inherently, the luminaire would have multiple power circuits for powering the lamp and adjusting some of the lens for automatically controlling the light).
Regarding claim 19, Gao ‘802 teaches the luminaire of claim 10. Gao ‘802 further teaches
a yoke assembly (5-1, 5-2, see fig. 1), wherein the head 2 is rotatably mounted in the yoke assembly for rotation about a tilt axis (para. # 86).
Regarding claim 20, Gao ‘802 teaches the luminaire of claim 19. Gao ‘802 further teaches
a base (where yoke assembly is attached), wherein the yoke assembly is rotatably mounted to the base for rotation about a pan axis (para. # 86).
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 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao ‘802 in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0290597, hereafter referred to as ‘Jurik ‘597’. Regarding claims 4 and 13, Gao ‘802 teaches the optical system of claim 1 and the luminaire of claim 10. However, Gao ‘802 fails to explicitly teach the tubular light spill shield comprises a black internal surface.
Jurik ‘597 teaches a luminaire (fig. 15) comprising a tubular light spill shield comprising black internal surfaces (131, 133, see para. # 63).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to modify the spill shield of Gao ‘802 to include black internal surfaces as taught by Jurik ‘597 in order to efficiently block unwanted and stray light.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 11-12 and 14-15 are 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jurik ‘476, Jurik ‘027 and Jurik ‘008 teach luminaires with zoom optics and light spill shields which are similar to applicant’s invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS M SEMBER whose telephone number is (571)272-2381. The examiner can normally be reached flexing generally from 7 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. M-F.
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 at 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.
/THOMAS M SEMBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights