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 .
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/30/2024 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
(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) 1-4, 7-9, 11-12, and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 20230389163 A1).
With regards to claim 1. Kim disclose(s):
A lighting system (figs 1-13) comprising: a plurality of lamps (100; fig 1; fig 2) configured to operate in an on mode and in an off mode (see fig 6b), wherein the plurality of lamps comprise C x N lamps (fig. 2), wherein C is a number of channels greater than 2 and N is a number of lamps per channel greater than 2 (see fig 2); a plurality of electronic switches (see 1-12 in fig 4), wherein each lamp is electrically coupled to a corresponding electronic switch (fig 4); a power source (400; fig 1; [0094]) configured to provide each lamp with an operating power comprising an operating current and an operating voltage [0094], wherein the power source provides a light system operating power comprising a sum of the operating power provided to each lamp in a given time period [0095]; and a controller (300/200; fig 1) electrically coupled to the electronic switches (see 1-12 in fig 4), wherein the controller comprises timing circuitry to control an amount of time each lamp is in the on mode and an amount of time each lamp is in the off mode [0029], wherein within a given time period, the amount of time each lamp is in the on mode is less than the amount of time each lamp is in the off mode, and wherein the frequency at which each lamp is in the on mode is at least 60 Hz (see fig 6b; [0061, 0111]).
With regards to claim 2. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein the controller (300/200; fig 1) is electrically coupled to the electronic switches via a hard wire connection [0057].
With regards to claim 3. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein the controller is electrically coupled to the electronic switches via a wireless connection [0084].
With regards to claim 4. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of lamps comprise LED lamps [0059].
With regards to claim 7. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein within a given time period, the amount of time each lamp is in the on mode is less than 20% the amount of time each lamp is in the off mode (see each LED in fig 6b).
With regards to claim 8. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein within a given time period, the amount of time each lamp is in the on mode is less than 15% the amount of time each lamp is in the off mode(see each LED in fig 6b).
With regards to claim 9. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein within a given time period, the amount of time each lamp is in the on mode is less than 10% the amount of time each lamp is in the off mode (see each LED in fig 6b; the examiner takes the position that 100%/12=8.3%).
With regards to claim 11. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein the frequency at which each lamp is in the on mode is in the range of 60 Hz to 1000 Hz (0061).
With regards to claim 12. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein each lamp comprises a rated power comprising a rated current and a rated voltage and wherein the operating power exceeds the rated power (the examiner takes the position that each LED have inherent rated values of current, voltages, and power; [0096]).
With regards to claim 16. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein C is a number greater than 4 (fig 2; fig 7).
With regards to claim 17. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein N is a number within the range of 4 to 12 fig 2; fig 7.
With regards to claim 18. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1, wherein the controller directs each of the C channels in parallel to sequentially operate the N lamps within each channel in the on mode and in the off mode (fig 2; [0065]).
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 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 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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230389163 A1).
With regards to claim 10. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1,
wherein within a given time period, the amount of time each lamp is in the on and off mode in range of duty cycle from 0-100%.
Kim does not disclose(s):
wherein within a given time period, the amount of time each lamp is in the on mode is less than 5% the amount of time each lamp is in the off mode.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the duty cycle so the on mode is less than 5% the amount of time each lamp is the off mode, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230389163 A1) in view of Hsu (US 20110175540 A1).
With regards to claim 5. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1,
Kim does not disclose(s):
wherein the plurality of lamps comprise incandescent lamps.
Hsu teaches:
wherein the plurality of lamps comprise incandescent lamps (see fig 1; [0013-0014]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Kim by implementing the plurality of lamps comprise incandescent lamps as disclosed by Hsu in order to provide overload protection the LEDs while reducing costs of manufacturing as taught/suggested by Hsu ([0006]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230389163 A1) in view of Lookman (US 20170332452 A1).
With regards to claim 6. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1,
Kim does not disclose(s):
wherein the plurality of electronic switches comprise a field effect transistor (FET).
Lookman teaches:
wherein the plurality of electronic switches comprise a field effect transistor FET (see 6-1 to 6-6 in fig 2; [004]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Kim by implementing the plurality of electronic switches comprise a field effect transistor as disclosed by Lookman in order to efficiently bypass an LED as taught/suggested by Lookman ([0006]).
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230389163 A1) in view of Kim (hereinafter referred as Kim ‘277; US 20170086277 A1).
With regards to claim 13-15. Kim disclose(s):
The lighting system of claim 1,
Kim does not disclose(s):
wherein the lighting system operates at a power savings of 50%, 70%, or 90%.
Kim ‘277 teaches
Adjust brightness based on environmental conditions to adjust power savings [0153].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to dim the lighting system operates at a power savings of 50%, 70%, or 90% as disclosed by Kim ‘277in order to save energy as taught/suggested by Kim ‘277 ([0153]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Doll (US 9900963 B1) discloses: a lighting system comprising: a plurality of lamps configured to operate in an on mode and in an off mode, wherein the plurality of lamps comprise C x N lamps, wherein C is a number of channels greater than 2 and N is a number of lamps per channel greater than 2.
PNG
media_image1.png
366
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENAN LUQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1044. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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 Han can be reached on 571-272-2078. 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.
/RENAN LUQUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896