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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference(s) cited within the IDS document(s) submitted on 6/14/2024 and 6/14/2024 have been considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, last line amend to “the reflective coating.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 13-20 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 13 recites “wherein the portion of the heat sink other than the rear surface is mounted to the housing by a thermally conductive material other than the coating, such that heat emitted by the light source is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.” (emphasis added).
There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the coating” in the claim. It is not clear what coating is being referred to and what if any limitations on the placement or properties of the coating should be included in the scope of the claim. Should the coating be any coating anywhere? Should the coating include the limitation of being at least partially covering a sloped interior surface of the bowl portion, as recited in claims 1 and 14? Including the latter limitation would also necessitate the inclusion of the bowl portion and the sloped interior surface. In such a case, should the bowl portion comprising a forward end also be included?
Therefore, the scope of claim 13 cannot be determined.
For the purposes of examination, Claim 13, will be examined as though it recited after line 1 that “a bowl portion comprising a forward end and a sloped interior surface, the sloped interior surface of the bowl portion being at least partially covered with a reflective coating” and Claim 13, lines 5 and 6 will be “the reflective coating.”
The above limitation inserted after line 1 of claim 13 is adapted from claim 14, lines 2-4. Accordingly, claim 2, will be examined as though lines 2-4 were removed in order to avoid duplication of limitations.
Similarly, claim 17, lines 2-3 and claim 20, lines 2-3 will be examined as removed to avoid duplication.
Claims 14-20 are dependent on claim 13 and contain the same deficiencies.
Claim 15 additionally recites “the reflective coating,” which would be without antecedent basis if the extra limitations of claim 13 were not included.
Claim 16 also recites “the forward end, ”which would be without antecedent basis if the extra limitations of claim 13 were not included.
Claim 13 recites in lines 4-5, that “the portion of the heat sink other than the rear surface is mounted to the housing.” However, the heat sink itself is recited to be a part of the housing. How can the heat sink, which is itself a part of the housing be mounted to the housing? Based on Applicant’s claims and disclosures, it appears that the element that the heat sink is mounted to by a thermally conductive material other than the coating, such that the heat emitted by the light source is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating is the bowl portion.
For the purposes of examination, claim 13 will be examined as though it recited the portion of the heat sink other than the rear surface is mounted to the bowl portion.
Double Patenting
Claim 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,007,079 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
The substantial difference between claim 1 of ‘079 and claim 1 is that the LED package of ‘079 is a rear facing LED package and the forward surface and the sloped surface of the heat sink is not recited in claim 1. However, as the recitation of a rear facing LED package satisfies the limitation of an LED package, the method of claim 1 of ‘079 satisfies all the limitations of claim 1.
Claim 2 recites limitations of the forward surface and the sloped surface of the heat sink present in claim 1 of 079.
Claim 2 of ‘079 recites the limitations of claim 3, with the exception that claim 3 clarifies that the LED package is rear facing, however this is already recited previously in claim 1 of ‘079.
Claims 3-11 of ‘079 recite the same limitations of claims 4-12, respectively.
Claim 12 of ‘079 recites all the limitations of claim 13.
Claim 13 of ‘079 recites all the limitations of claim 14, except that the heat sink further comprises a sloped surface that extends from a perimeter of the bottom portion. However, this limitation is already recited in parent claim 13 of ‘079.
Claims 14-19 of ‘079 recites all the limitations of claim 15-20, respectively.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,680,687. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while claims 1-11 of ‘687 are a product claim and claims 1-12 of the Application are process claims, the process is to generically assemble a housing and would therefore be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have the final product of the method of assembly.
Claim 2 recites limitations of the forward surface and the sloped surface of the heat sink present in claim 1 of ‘687.
While claim 12-19 of ‘687 recites “a rear directional light source facing away from the forward emitting end,” this corresponds to the Application claim 13-20 limitation of “a light source facing away from an opening of the housing” as the forward emitting end would need to be an opening in order to allow for forward emission.
Furthermore, Claim 13 of ‘687 recites all the limitations of claim 14, except that the heat sink further comprises a sloped surface that extends from a perimeter of the bottom portion. However, this limitation is already recited in parent claim 12 of ‘079.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,306,877 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the “sloped surface of the heat sink” in claims 1 and 13 of ‘877 corresponds to the “portion other than the rear surface” of claim 1, line 4 and claim 13, line 4 of the Application. The other parts of claims 1-20 of the Application are substantially recited by claims 1-20 of ‘877. While claims 1-12 of ‘687 are a product claim and claims 1-12 of the Application are process claims, the process is to generically assemble a housing and would therefore be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have the final product of the method of assembly.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,774,996 in view of Dellock et al. (US PGPub 2017/0321864 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of ‘996 recite substantially all the limitations of claims 1-20 of the Application, except the coating being a reflective coating. However, Dellock et al. teaches (Fig. 1) the sloped interior surface of bowl 30 being coated with a reflective coating 32 to maximize the percentage of incident light that exits in the desired direction (Paragraph 25). Furthermore, Dellock et al. teaches a material of the bowl portion being ceramic or metal (Paragraph 25, corresponds to Application claim 5).
Therefore, it would be obvious to make the coating a reflective coating in order to maximize light use efficiency, as taught by Dellock et al. Furthermore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bowl material to be ceramic or metal since the selection form among known suitable materials for their known purposes is generally within the abilities of one having ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art to use Aluminum as the reflective coating due to its well-known high reflectivity (Claims 10 and 15).
Furthermore, it is noted that the “sloped side portion” in claims 1 and 13 of ‘877 corresponds to the “portion other than the rear surface” of claim 1of the Application.
While claims 1-12 of ‘687 are a product claim and claims 1-12 of the Application are process claims, the process is to generically assemble a housing and would therefore be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have the final product of the method of assembly.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,415,766 B2 in view of Dellock et al. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 and 12 of the ‘766 patent recite substantially all the limitations of claims 1 and 13, except the coating being a reflective coating. However, Dellock et al. teaches (Fig. 1) the sloped interior surface of bowl 30 being coated with a reflective coating 32 to maximize the percentage of incident light that exits in the desired direction (Paragraph 25). Furthermore, Dellock et al. teaches a material of the bowl portion being ceramic or metal (Paragraph 25, corresponds to Application claim 5).
Therefore, it would be obvious to make the coating a reflective coating in order to maximize light use efficiency, as taught by Dellock et al. Furthermore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bowl material to be ceramic or metal since the selection form among known suitable materials for their known purposes is generally within the abilities of one having ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, it is well-known in the art to use Aluminum as the reflective coating due to its well-known high reflectivity (Claim 10).
Furthermore, it is noted that the “sloped side portion” in claims 1 and 14 of ‘766 corresponds to the “portion other than the rear surface” of claim 1, line 4 and claim 13, line 4 of the Application.
Claim 2 of ‘766 recite substantially the same limitations of claim 2.
Claim 3 of ‘766 recites the limitations of claim 3, with the exception that claim 3 clarifies that the LED package is rear facing, however this is already recited previously in claim 1 of ‘766.
Claim 4 of ‘766 recite substantially the same limitations of claim 4.
Claim 6 of ‘766 recites substantially the same limitations of claim 6, except some of the limitations are recited in parent claim 1 of ‘079.
Claim 7-9 and 11 of ‘766 recites substantially the same limitations of claim 7-9 and 11, respectively.
Claim 11 of ‘766 recites substantially all the limitations of claim 12, except that the limitation of electrical leads is recited in parent claim 1 of ‘076.
While claims 1-12 of ‘766 are a product claim and claims 1-12 of the Application are process claims, the process is to generically assemble a housing and would therefore be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have the final product of the method of assembly.
Claim 14 of ‘766 recites substantially all the limitations of claim 16.
Claim 16 of ‘766 recites substantially all the limitations of claim 17. Some of the limitations are recited in parent claim 12 of ‘766.
Claims 17 and 18 of ‘766 recites substantially all the limitations of claims 18 and 19, respectively.
Claim 12 of ‘766 recites substantially all the limitations of claim 20.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 10, 13, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feit (US PGPub 2014/0347852 A1) in view of Van Elmpt et al. (US PGPub 2011/0180819 A1).
As to claim 1, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) a method of assembling a housing comprising: providing a bowl portion 117 (Paragraph 40, reflector) comprising a forward end (toward 112) and a sloped interior surface, wherein the sloped interior surface (Fig. 4, Paragraph 40) is at least partially covered with a reflective coating (Paragraph 44, coating that provides a shiny silver appearance); positioning at least one LED package 115 relative to the forward end; and providing a heat sink 111 (Paragraph 39) having a bottom portion comprising a rear surface (toward 113), and a portion other than the rear surface, and mounting the portion of the heat sink 111 other than the rear surface of the heat sink 111 to the bowl portion 117 (Paragraph 40).
PNG
media_image1.png
262
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Feit
Feit discloses the bowl portion 117 to also act as heat sink and heat radiator (Paragraphs 27, 41 and 54), but is silent as to mounting of the heat sink to the bowl portion being by a thermally conductive material other than the reflective coating, such that heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.
Van Elmpt et al. teaches (Fig. 1) mounting the bowl portion 5 to the part 4, 6 analogous to the heat sink of Feit by thermally conductive material 10 (Paragraph 32, thermally conductive glue) other than the reflective coating 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
318
298
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Van Elmpt et al.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to thermally conductive glue in order to mount the bowl portion to the heat sink of Feit to achieve the effect of secure mounting and thermal conduction to the bowl portion, as taught by Van Elmpt et al. In the modified device, since the heat passes from the LED (Feit #115) to the heat sink (Feit #111) to the bowl portion (Feit #117, heat path described by Van Elmpt et al. Paragraph 40) and since the bowl portion is in intimate contact with the reflective coating (Feit Paragraph 44), thereby causing some heat to pass to the reflective coating by conduction, the heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.
As to claim 2, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) that the heat sink further comprises a sloped surface that extends from a perimeter of the bottom portion (bottom portion cylindrical part of Feit Fig. 4, #111, sloped surface is the sloped portion above the cylindrical portion); the bottom portion further comprises a forward surface (side of cylinder that it toward sloped surface) that is bordered by the sloped surface of the heat sink 111.
As to claim 5, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) that the sloped interior surface of the bowl portion is a material selected from the group consisting of: plastic, ceramic material, metal, aluminum, glass, and hard-pressed glass (Paragraph 44).
As to claim 10, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) that the reflective coating is an aluminum coating (Paragraph 44, aluminized) and the housing further comprises an optical component 112 (Paragraph 43, lens) enclosing the forward end.
As to claim 13, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) A housing comprising: a bowl portion 117 (Paragraph 40, reflector) comprising a forward end (toward 112) and a sloped interior surface (Fig. 4, Paragraph 40), the sloped interior surface of the bowl portion being at least partially covered with a reflective coating (Paragraph 44, coating that provides a shiny silver appearance) a light source 115 facing away from an opening of the housing (Fig.4, light source 115 faces away from openings in 113, 118, Paragraph 42); and a heat sink 111 (Paragraph 39) having a rear surface (toward 113) and a portion other than the rear surface, wherein the portion of the heat sink 111 other than the rear surface is mounted to the housing 117 (Paragraph 40).
Feit discloses the bowl portion 117 to also act as heat sink and heat radiator (Paragraphs 27, 41 and 54), but is silent as to mounting of the heat sink to the bowl portion being by a thermally conductive material other than the reflective coating, such that heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.
Van Elmpt et al. teaches (Fig. 1) mounting the bowl portion 5 to the part 4, 6 analogous to the heat sink of Feit by thermally conductive material 10 (Paragraph 32, thermally conductive glue) other than the reflective coating 3.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use thermally conductive glue in order to mount the bowl portion to the heat sink of Feit to achieve the effect of secure mounting and thermal conduction to the bowl portion, as taught by Van Elmpt et al. In the modified device, since the heat passes from the LED (Feit #115) to the heat sink (Feit #111) to the bowl portion (Feit #117, heat path described by Van Elmpt et al. Paragraph 40) and since the bowl portion is in intimate contact with the reflective coating (Feit Paragraph 44), thereby causing some heat to pass to the reflective coating by conduction, the heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.
As to claim 15, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) that the reflective coating is an aluminum coating (Paragraph 44, aluminized).
As to claim 16, Feit discloses (Fig. 4) an optical component 112 (Paragraph 43, lens) enclosing the forward end.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feit in view of Van Elmpt et al. as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Chang et al. (US PGPub 2011/0103054 A1).
As to claim 3, Feit in view of Van Elmpt et al. teaches one or more forward facing LED packages (Feit Fig. 4 # 115) facing toward a forward end, such that the forward end defines an emitting end,
Feit in view of Van Elmpt et al. is silent as to a rear facing LED package, the forward facing LED packages being mounted on a forward board, the at least one rear facing LED package is mounted on a component board, the forward board is mounted to the forward surface, and the component board is mounted to the rear surface.
Chang et al. teaches (Fig. 1) extending the bottom portion of the heat sink 40 to accommodate to a rear facing LED package 33, the forward facing LED packages 25 being mounted on a forward board 21, the at least one rear facing LED package 33 is mounted on a component board 31, the forward board 21 is mounted to the forward surface of heat sink 40, and the component board 31 is mounted to the rear surface of heat sink 40.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the heat sink 111 of Feit to accommodate rear facing LED packages and associated component board on the rear surface of the bottom portion of the heat sink and a forward board mounted to the forward surface of the bottom portion of the heat sink in order to allow for both forward and backward emitting functions as taught by Chang et al.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feit in view of Van Elmpt et al. and Chang et al. as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Zheng et al. (US PGPub 2018/0180272 A1, which has a foreign filing on 12/27/2016 of CN 201611222387.0, published as CN 106641885 A, citations herein made in “A” / “B” format will refer to the US PGPub / machine translation of CN 106641885, respectively).
As to claim 4, Feit in view of Van Elmpt et al. and Chang et al. is silent as to one or more driver circuit components, the one or more driver circuit components being mounted on the component board.
Zheng et al. discloses comprising one or more driver circuit components 53, the one or more driver circuit 53 components being mounted on the component board 512. (Paragraph 38 / Paragraph 40)
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include driving elements on the rear facing component board in order to drive the rear facing LED packages since it is taught as a suitable location by Zheng et al. and the selection from among known suitable alternatives for their known purposes is generally within the abilities of one having ordinary skill in the art.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. in view of Dingemans et al. (US PGPub 2015/0109793 A1), or alternatively in further view of Van Elmpt et al.
As to claim 1, Chang et al. discloses (Figs. 1-3) a method of assembling a housing comprising: providing a bowl portion 22 (Paragraph 25, reflector) comprising a forward end (toward 23) and a sloped interior surface; positioning at least one LED package 33 (Paragraph 26) relative to the forward end; and providing a heat sink 21, 40 having a bottom portion comprising a rear surface (toward 50), and a portion other than the rear surface, and mounting the portion of the heat sink 21, 40 other than the rear surface of the heat sink to the bowl portion 22.
PNG
media_image3.png
428
358
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
470
336
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
428
382
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Chang et al.
Chang et al. discloses the bowl portion to be a reflector (Paragraph 25), but is silent as to the sloped interior surface being at least partially covered with a reflective coating, wherein the bowl portion is a thermal interface (Paragraphs 10 and 38). Furthermore, Chang et al. is silent as to the bowl portion being mounted to the heat sink via a thermally conductive material other than the reflective coating.
Dingemans et al. teaches (Fig. 1) including a reflective coating (Paragraph 38). Furthermore, Dingemans et al. teaches mounting the bowl portion 4 to the LED carrying layer 6 via thermally conductive material 8 and solder 5 to aid in heat dissipation (Paragraph 38).
PNG
media_image6.png
180
260
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Dingemans et al.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bowl portion to be a thermal interface with a reflective coating in order to provide additional thermal dissipation via the thermal interface, while also ensuring reflectivity by the reflective coating, as taught by Dingemans et al. Furthermore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the thermally conductive material and solder in order to aid in heat dissipation and mount the bowl portion, as taught by Dingemans et al. In the modified device, since the heat passes from the LED (Chang et al. #33) to the heat sink (Chang et al. #21, 40) to the bowl portion (Chang et al. #22, heat path analogous to that described by Dingemans et al. Paragraph 38) and since the bowl portion (Dingemans et al. #2) is in intimate contact with the reflective coating (Dingemans et al. #3), thereby causing some heat to pass to the reflective coating by conduction, the heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.
As to the heat sink being mounted to the bowl portion by a thermally conductive material, this is taught in view of Dingemans et al. Paragraph 38, #5, 8.
Alternatively, should it be found that the heat sink of the modified device is not mounted by a thermally conductive material, Van Elmpt et al. teaches (Fig. 1) mounting the bowl portion 5 to the part 4, 6 analogous to the heat sink of Chang et al. by thermally conductive material 10 (Paragraph 32, thermally conductive glue as an alternative to solder) other than the reflective coating 3.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use thermally conductive glue instead of solder in order to mount the bowl portion to the heat sink to achieve the effect of secure mounting and thermal conduction to the bowl portion, as taught by Van Elmpt et al.
As to claim 2, Chang et al. discloses (Fig. 1) that the heat sink 21, 40 further comprises a sloped surface (sloped surface is part of 40 that is angled with respect to the cylinder that extends to 50) that extends from a perimeter of the bottom portion (bottom portion is cylinder of 40 that extends toward 50); the bottom portion further comprises a forward surface (top part of said cylinder in 40) that is bordered by the sloped surface of the heat sink 21, 40.
As to claim 13, Chang et al. discloses (Figs. 1-3) A housing comprising: a bowl portion 22 comprising a forward end (toward 23) and a sloped interior surface, a light source 33 facing away from an opening (opening of 22 covered by 23) of the housing; and a heat sink 21, 40 having a rear surface (part of 40 that faces 50) and a portion other than the rear surface, wherein the portion of the heat sink 21, 40 other than the rear surface is mounted to the bowl portion 22.
Chang et al. discloses the bowl portion to be a reflector (Paragraph 25), but is silent as to the sloped interior surface being at least partially covered with a reflective coating, wherein the bowl portion is a thermal interface (Paragraphs 10 and 38). Furthermore, Chang et al. is silent as to the bowl portion being mounted to the heat sink via a thermally conductive material other than the reflective coating.
Dingemans et al. teaches (Fig. 1) including a reflective coating (Paragraph 38). Furthermore, Dingemans et al. teaches mounting the bowl portion 4 to the LED carrying layer 6 via thermally conductive material 8 and solder 5 to aid in heat dissipation (Paragraph 38).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bowl portion to be a thermal interface with a reflective coating in order to provide additional thermal dissipation via the thermal interface, while also ensuring reflectivity by the reflective coating, as taught by Dingemans et al. Furthermore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the thermally conductive material and solder in order to aid in heat dissipation and mount the bowl portion, as taught by Dingemans et al. In the modified device, since the heat passes from the LED (Chang et al. #33) to the heat sink (Chang et al. #21, 40) to the bowl portion (Chang et al. #22, heat path analogous to that described by Dingemans et al. Paragraph 38) and since the bowl portion (Dingemans et al. #2) is in intimate contact with the reflective coating (Dingemans et al. #3), thereby causing some heat to pass to the reflective coating by conduction, the heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating.
As to the heat sink being mounted to the bowl portion by a thermally conductive material, this is taught in view of Dingemans et al. Paragraph 38, #5, 8.
Alternatively, should it be found that the heat sink of the modified device is not mounted by a thermally conductive material, Van Elmpt et al. teaches (Fig. 1) mounting the bowl portion 5 to the part 4, 6 analogous to the heat sink of Chang et al. by thermally conductive material 10 (Paragraph 32, thermally conductive glue as an alternative to solder) other than the reflective coating 3.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use thermally conductive glue instead of solder in order to mount the bowl portion to the heat sink to achieve the effect of secure mounting and thermal conduction to the bowl portion, as taught by Van Elmpt et al.
Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. in view of Dingemans et al., or alternatively in further view of Van Elmpt et al. as applied to claims 13 above, and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US PGPub 2011/0089831 A1).
As to claim 20, Chang et al. discloses the housing further comprises a second light source 25 faces toward the forward end (end of 22 that faces 23); and electrical leads for the forward directional light source pass through an opening from the rear surface of the heat sink to a forward surface of the heat sink.
Chang et al. in view of in view of Dingemans et al., or alternatively in further view of Van Elmpt et al. is silent as to electrical leads for the forward directional light source pass through an opening from the rear surface of the heat sink to a forward surface of the heat sink.
Takahashi et al. teaches (Fig. 1) electrical leads 35 for the one or more forward facing LED packages (Fig. 3 #19, corresponds to #21 of Fig. 1) passing through an opening 33 in the supporting structure 5 (Paragraph 57) between the forward and rear surfaces of the supporting structure in order to allow power supply leads 35 to pass (Paragraph 49).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in the absence of an explicit teaching of how to electrically connect the driver circuit and light emitting devices to look to the prior art and therefore make the connection via electrical leads that pass through holes in the supporting structure in order to allow passage of the electrical leads, as taught by Takahashi et al., in order to allow the driving circuit to function in its intended purpose to drive the light emitting devices.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9, 11, 12, 14, 17-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable provided the double patenting and 112 Rejections were overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 6, as seen in the rejections of claim 1, above, the interpretation of the references include the bowl to be a reflector (Feit #117, Chang et al. #22), while the heat sink (Feit #111, Chang et al. #40) forms part of the cylindrical structure that extends toward base cap (Feit #118, Chang et al. #50).
This is the opposite of the type of device depicted by Applicant’s disclosure in which the bowl (Fig. 1 #22) forms part that extends toward base #14 via connection with neck portion #32 and heat sink 40 made of, for example, aluminum (Paragraph 47) and in position analogous to the heat sink of Feit and Chang et al. (Feit #111, Chang et al. #40)
While the limitations of claim 1 is broad enough to read on the modified device of Feit in view of Van Elmpt et al. OR Chang et al. in view of Dingemans et al., or alternatively in further view of Van Elmpt et al., the limitation of claim 6 wherein “the bowl portion comprises a first joining end, the housing further comprises a neck portion comprising a second joining end, the bowl portion and the neck portion are joined at the first joining end and the second joining end, and the neck portion further comprises a base end disposed opposite the second joining end and a neck cavity disposed between the base end and the second joining end” is a limitation that does not read on the modified devices of the applied prior art rejections. While the non-sloped portion of #117 of Feit may be a neck portion on its own, the additional recited neck structure of the neck portion comprises a base end disposed opposite the second joining end and a neck cavity disposed between the base end and the second joining end precludes the element 117 from having the recited structure of the neck portion.
While it is known per se to have a bowl portion joined to a neck portion with a neck cavity, for example if the heat sinks of Feit in the rejection of claim 1 was instead interpreted to be the bowl and neck portion, this interpretation would not simultaneously allow for the sloped interior surface is at least partially covered with a reflective coating and mounting the portion of the heat sink other than the rear surface of the heat sink to the bowl portion by a thermally conductive material other than the reflective coating, such that heat emitted by the at least one LED package is passed, via the heat sink, to the coating. Furthermore, as the element 117 is a reflector in Feit, the bowl portion would not appear to need a reflective coating on the sloped interior surface of 111, as it would be blocked by reflector 117.
Therefore, while all the limitations of claim 6 are known per se, the prior art does not teach or suggest all the claimed limitations of claim 6 in combination.
Claims 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 are dependent on claim 6 and contain the same allowable subject matter.
Claim 14 contains allowable subject matter for substantially the same reasons as those detailed with respect to claim 6. While claim 14 contains different recited neck structure of “the neck portion further comprises a base end and a sidewall extending between the base end and the second joining end, at least a portion of light emitted by the rear facing directional light source passes through the sidewall; and the sidewall of the neck portion is (a) clear or (b) frosted,” than claim 6, this structure is also sufficient to preclude #117 of Feit from being the neck portion with the recited structure.
Claim 17 contains allowable subject matter for substantially the same reasons as those detailed with respect to claim 6, based on the examination of claim 13 including the bowl portion and reflective coating as discussed in the 112 Rejection.
Claims 18 and 19 are dependent on claim 17 and contain the same allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kang (US PGPub 2012/0134133 A1) teaches (Fig. 6a) a reflector formed by a coating 135 to increase reflection efficiency (Paragraph 118). Furthermore, Kang teaches (Fig. 5) including a heat dissipation pad 121 to mount between substrate 110 and heat sink 120 in order to provide heat conductivity to transfer heat (Paragraph 92).
Beregszaszi et al. (US PGPub 2012/0268942 A1) teaches (Fig. 4) using the reflector bowl 402 for the purposes of transferring heat (Paragraph 33).
Lee et al. (US PGPub 2014/0160754 A1) teaches chromium and aluminum to have excellent heat conductivity (Paragraph 134).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN Y HORIKOSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-7811. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Tuesday 2-10PM EDT.
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.
/S.Y.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875