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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/2/26 has been entered.
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.
Claims 20-23, 25, 27-30, 33-34and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lys [US 7221104] in view of Yeon [US 2017/0130909].
As to claim 20, Lys discloses a light emitting device [see figures 1 and 2, for example], comprising: a first light source disposed on the substrate [left two 100, figure 2] and including a first light emitter and a second light emitter [each 100 in first light source]; and a second light source [right 2 100 in figure 2] disposed on the substrate and including a third light emitter and a fourth light emitter [each 100 in the light source]; wherein the first light source is configured to emit a first light and the second light source is configured to emit a second light having a peak intensity that is different from a peak intensity of the first light [see column 10, line 40 – column 11, line 29]. Lys further teaches a lighting configuration which may conform to limitations wherein the first light emitter and the second light emitter [the left two 100 in figure 2] emit light having substantially the same peak wavelength or color [see column 9, lines 28-47, discussing how a processor controls the intensity of the colored LEDs as desired by a user] but may be configured to emit light of different quantities [see column 9, lines 28-47]. Such a configuration also may be implemented to the third and fourth light sources [right two 100 in figure 2].
Lys fails to explicitly disclose a substrate comprising a printed circuit board for the lighting unit.
Yeon teaches mounting the light sources on a luminaire comprising a printed circuit board was well known [see paragraph 49]. It would have been obvious to implement a printed circuit board as they are well known for their long life, economical manufacturing on a large scale, resistance to vibrations, ease of testing, low heat production, overall robustness of the integrated and printed circuit, and reduction in drawn current [see Lys, column 76, lines 49-54].
As to claim 21, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 20, wherein the peak intensity of the first light is greater than the peak intensity of the second light [see column 9, lines 25-47, and column 12, lines 59-60].
As to claim 22, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 20, wherein the peak intensity of the first light is greater than the peak intensity of the second light [see column 9, lines 25-47, and column 12, lines 59-60].
As to claim 23, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 20, wherein the printed circuit is configured to control an intensity of at least one of the first light source or the second light source [see column 9, lines 25-47].
As to claim 25, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 20, wherein the first light has a peak wavelength that is shorter than a peak wavelength of the second light [see column 10, lines 40 – column 11, line 29].
As to claim 27, Lys discloses a light emitting device [see figures 1, 2], comprising: a first light source [left two 100, figure 2] disposed on a substrate and including a first light emitter and a second light emitter [each 100 in first light source]; and a second light source disposed on the substrate [right 2 100 in figure 2] and including a third light emitter and a fourth light emitter [each 100 in second light source]; wherein the first light source is configured to emit a first light and the second light source is configured to emit a second light having a peak intensity that is different from a peak intensity of the first light [see column 10, line 40 – column 11, line 29], wherein a quantity of light emitted from the first light emitter is different from a quantity of light emitted from the fourth light emitter [see column 9, lines 25-47], and wherein a quantity of light emitted from the third light emitter is different from a quantity of light emitted from the second light emitter [see column 9, lines 25-47]. Lys further teaches a lighting configuration which may conform to limitations wherein the first light emitter and the second light emitter [the left two 100 in figure 2] emit light having substantially the same peak wavelength or color [see column 9, lines 28-47, discussing how a processor controls the intensity of the colored LEDs as desired by a user] but may be configured to emit light of different quantities [see column 9, lines 28-47]. Such a configuration also may be implemented to the third and fourth light sources [right two 100 in figure 2].
Lys fails to explicitly disclose a substrate comprising a printed circuit board for the lighting unit.
Yeon teaches mounting the light sources on a luminaire comprising a printed circuit board was well known [see paragraph 49]. It would have been obvious to implement a printed circuit board as they are well known for their long life, economical manufacturing on a large scale, resistance to vibrations, ease of testing, low heat production, overall robustness of the integrated and printed circuit, and reduction in drawn current [see Lys, column 76, lines 49-54].
As to claim 28, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 27, wherein the peak intensity of the first light is greater than the peak intensity of the second light [see column 9, lines 25-47, and column 12, lines 59-60].
As to claim 29, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 28, wherein the quantity of the light emitted from the first light emitter is greater than the quantity of the light emitted from the third light emitter [see column 9, lines 25-47, and column 12, lines 59-60].
As to claim 30, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 27, wherein the printed circuit is configured to control an intensity of at least one of the first light source or the second light source [see column 9, lines 25-47].
As to claim 33, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 27, wherein the first light has a peak wavelength that is shorter than a peak wavelength of the second light [see column 10, line 40 – column 11, line 29].
As to claim 34, Lys discloses a light emitting device [see figures 1, 2], comprising: a first light source disposed on a substrate [left 2 100s, figure 2] and including a first light emitter and a second light emitter [each 100 in the first light source]; and a second light source [right 2 100s, figure 2] disposed on the substrate and including a third light emitter and a fourth light emitter [each 100 in the second light source], wherein the first light source is configured to emit a first light and the second light source is configured to emit a second light having a quantity of light that is different from a quantity of light of the first light [see column 9, lines 25-47], wherein a quantity of light emitted from the first light emitter is different from a quantity of light emitted from the fourth light emitter [see column 9, lines 25-47], and wherein a quantity of light emitted from the third light emitter is different from a quantity of light emitted from the second light emitter [see column 9, lines 25-47]. Lys further teaches a lighting configuration which may conform to limitations wherein the first light emitter and the second light emitter [the left two 100 in figure 2] emit light having substantially the same peak wavelength or color [see column 9, lines 28-47, discussing how a processor controls the intensity of the colored LEDs as desired by a user] but may be configured to emit light of different quantities [see column 9, lines 28-47]. Such a configuration also may be implemented to the third and fourth light sources [right two 100 in figure 2].
Lys fails to explicitly disclose a substrate comprising a printed circuit board for the lighting unit.
Yeon teaches mounting the light sources on a luminaire comprising a printed circuit board was well known [see paragraph 49]. It would have been obvious to implement a printed circuit board as they are well known for their long life, economical manufacturing on a large scale, resistance to vibrations, ease of testing, low heat production, overall robustness of the integrated and printed circuit, and reduction in drawn current [see Lys, column 76, lines 49-54].
As to claim 38, Lys discloses the light emitting device of claim 36, wherein the quantity of the light emitted from the first light emitter is greater than the quantity of the light emitted from the third light emitter [see column 9, lines 25-47, and column 12, lines 59-60].
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 9/2/26 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues “ Lys, however, does not disclose or suggest that a first light emitter and a second light emitter emit light having substantially the same peak wavelength and different quantities of light, as now recited in the claims. Rather, Lys discloses sets of uniformly colored LEDs that are driven collectively through a common programming resistor associated with each LED set. Thus, while Lys discusses controlling the maximum current through each LED set as a whole, Lys does not disclose or suggest that individual light emitters within a given LED set emit light having substantially the same peak wavelength and different quantities of light. Nor does varying the current among the differently colored LED sets of Lys disclose the claimed relationship between individual light emitters having substantially the same peak wavelength”. Examiner disagrees with applicant’s contention. Examiner’s read of Lys is that any of the modules 100 in figure 2 may be any single color or a collection of colored LEDs such as that shown in figure 3. In such a scenario, each pair of lighting modules 100 [see figure 2] may be configured to emit the same wavelength of light, but at different intensities. As such, because the invention disclosed by Lys is capable of producing the light as claimed, Lys at least fairly and fully teaches the claimed elements and limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYON GYLLSTROM whose telephone number is (571)270-1498. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jong-Suk Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/BRYON T GYLLSTROM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights