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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (Claims 1-4 and 6-9) in the reply filed on 06/17/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 5 is allowable. Claims 10-11 were previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(a), the restriction requirement between inventions I and II, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 04/22/2026, is hereby withdrawn and claims 10-11 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/23/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
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 1-4 and 9 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.
Claims 1 and 9 recite the limitation "two total reflection surfaces" and subsequently recites that the two first emission surfaces are “configured to emit light reflected by the total reflection surface.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the total reflection surface” (singular) in the claim, as only "two total reflection surfaces" (plural) were previously introduced. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to a specific one of the two total reflection surfaces or both collectively. The Office suggests correction to “a respective one of the two total reflection surfaces” or “the two total reflection surfaces,” as appropriate to the intended scope. For examination purposes, the Office interprets “the total reflection surface” to mean “the two total reflection surfaces.”
Claims 2-4 inherit these deficiencies for their dependance on claim 1.
Claim 2 is rejected for presenting an identical issue as claim 1 (improper reference to “the total reflection surface” (singular)).
Claims 1 and 9 further recite the limitation "two first emission surfaces" and subsequently recites that the “the two virtual half straight lines each intersect the first emission surface.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the first emission surface” (singular) in the claim, as only "two first emission surfaces" (plural) were previously introduced. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to a specific one of the two first emission surfaces or both collectively. The Office suggests correction to “a respective one of the two first emission surfaces” or “the two first emission surfaces,” as appropriate to the intended scope. For examination purposes, the Office interprets “the first emission surface” to mean “the two first emission surfaces.”
Claims 2-4 inherit these deficiencies for their dependance on claim 1.
Claim 2 is rejected for presenting an identical issue as claim 1 (improper reference to “the first emission surface” (singular)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 1, the closest art Kim (US 20150338057 A1) teaches in Fig. 1: a light flux controlling member (“side-emitting LED lens 10”; [0030]) configured to control light emitted from a light emitting element (“LED chip 11”; [0031]) so as to spread the light when the light flux controlling member is disposed over the light emitting element so as to intersect an optical axis (“optical axis 12”; [0033]) of the light emitting (see Fig. 1 in which 10 is disposed over 11 and the ray trace depicts a dispersion of light from the LED), the light flux controlling member (10) comprising:
an incidence surface (100) that is an inner surface of a recess that is open on a rear side (20) (“The lower surface 20 may include an incident surface 100”; [0031]), the incidence surface (100) being configured to allow incidence of the light emitted from the light emitting element (11) (“incident surface 100 on which light emitted from an LED chip 11 installed on a circuit board 9 is incident”; [0031]);
two total reflection surfaces (“upper surface 30 is formed so as to total-reflect light L1”; [0032]), disposed on a front side (see Fig. 1 in which 30 is disposed opposite to rear side 20), and configured to reflect, away from the optical axis in a different direction, a part of light entered from the incidence surface (see Fig. 1 in which surface 30 reflects light away from the optical axis, see [0032]);
two first emission surfaces (“side surface 40”; [0032]) configured to emit light reflected by the total reflection surface (“the side surface 40 is formed so as to emit light L2 total-reflected from the upper surface 30”; [0032], see the beam path of Fig. 1), to outside toward two directions along a first axis perpendicular to the optical axis (see the exit rays in Fig. 1 from light L1 and L2. These rays exit the lens 10 in two directions along a first axis perpendicular to the optical axis 12).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach: a second emission surface disposed at a part on a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis between the two total reflection surfaces, the second emission surface being configured to emit another part of the light entered from the incidence surface, to the outside while spreading the light, wherein the two total reflection surfaces are each a part of a surface that is obtained through rotation with a virtual half straight line as a rotation axis, wherein the two virtual half straight lines each intersect the first emission surface, wherein in plan view of the light flux controlling member, one ends of the two virtual half straight lines are located at the same point on the second axis, and an angle between the two virtual half straight lines is smaller than 180°, and wherein in plan view of the light flux controlling member, the angle between the two virtual half straight lines is formed on a side on which an area of the second emission surface is larger with respect to the first axis.
In an alternate invention in the field of micro LED lenses Kim (US 20190035327 A1), hereinafter Kim327, teaches in Fig. 4: a second emission surface (“the second emitting surface 123b-1”; [0032], wherein the first emission surface is 123a-1) disposed at a part on a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis (see Fig. 4 in which 123b-1 is disposed perpendicular to the OA).
Kim327 teaches to a configuration with two emission surfaces however Kim327 cannot teach to the emission surfaces in relation to the reflecting surfaces as required by the language of claim 1. Thus, Kim327 fails to explicitly teach: a second emission surface disposed at a part on a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis between the two total reflection surfaces, the second emission surface being configured to emit another part of the light entered from the incidence surface, to the outside while spreading the light, wherein the two total reflection surfaces are each a part of a surface that is obtained through rotation with a virtual half straight line as a rotation axis, wherein the two virtual half straight lines each intersect the first emission surface, wherein in plan view of the light flux controlling member, one ends of the two virtual half straight lines are located at the same point on the second axis, and an angle between the two virtual half straight lines is smaller than 180°, and wherein in plan view of the light flux controlling member, the angle between the two virtual half straight lines is formed on a side on which an area of the second emission surface is larger with respect to the first axis.
Therefore, based on the configuration of Kim it would be improper hindsight to modify Kim327 to provide a device in which “a second emission surface disposed at a part on a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis between the two total reflection surfaces, the second emission surface being configured to emit another part of the light entered from the incidence surface, to the outside while spreading the light, wherein the two total reflection surfaces are each a part of a surface that is obtained through rotation with a virtual half straight line as a rotation axis, wherein the two virtual half straight lines each intersect the first emission surface, wherein in plan view of the light flux controlling member, one ends of the two virtual half straight lines are located at the same point on the second axis, and an angle between the two virtual half straight lines is smaller than 180°, and wherein in plan view of the light flux controlling member, the angle between the two virtual half straight lines is formed on a side on which an area of the second emission surface is larger with respect to the first axis.” Therefore, the combination of features is considered to be allowable.
Claims 2-4 would be allowable for its dependence on claim 1.
Claims 5-8 and 10-11 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 5, the closest art Liu (US 11105474 B2) teaches in Figs. 4-5: an irradiation device comprising:
a light emitting device (Fig. 4) including a light emitting element (“a light source 300”; col 3 line 40) and a light flux controlling member (“a strip lens 400”; col 3 line 40) configured to spread light emitted from the light emitting element (“the strip lens 400 is used to adjust light distribution of the light source 300”; col 4 lines 18-21); and
an irradiated surface (“illumination surface 800”; col 5 line 11, Fig. 5) including a major axis and a minor axis (see annotated Figure 1 below which depicts the major and minor axis), and configured to be irradiated with the light emitted from the light emitting device (“the light source 300 is opposite to the illumination surface 800”; col 5 lines 12-13, see also the beam path of Fig. 5),
wherein when, in an XYZ coordinate system with three axes orthogonal to each other (see annotated figure below), the light emitting element (300) is disposed such that the optical axis (301) of the light emitting element coincides with a Z axis (see annotated Figure 1 below in which the z axis coincides with the optical axis 301), and that a center of a light-emitting surface of the light emitting element is located at an origin of the XYZ coordinate system (see annotated Figure 1 below), the irradiated surface (800) is disposed in an orientation of receiving the light emitted from the light emitting device so as to intersect the Z axis on a plus side (see annotated Figure 1 in which the light intersects 800 in a positive z direction) in the Z axis with an X axis and the major axis being parallel to each other (see annotated Figure 1), and the light flux controlling member is symmetric about a YZ cross-section including a Y axis and the Z axis (“In order to make the illumination uniform and symmetrical, in this embodiment, the first total reflection surface 402, the first light emitting surface 403, the second total reflection surface 404 and the second light emitting surface 405 on both sides of the main optical axis 301 are symmetrically arranged”; col 5 lines 37-42).
PNG
media_image1.png
416
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated Fig 5 of Liu
However, Liu fails to explicitly teach a configuration such that “the irradiation device has a luminance distribution with peaks in three directions toward points (Xn, Yn, Zn; n=1, 2 or 3) that satisfy the following conditions:
(Direction 1) X1>0, Y1>0, Z1>O and X1>Y1, X1>Z1 direction
(Direction 2) X2<0, Y2>0, Z2>O and IX2|>Y2, |X2|>Z2 direction, and
(Direction 3) X3 0, Y3>O and Z3>0 direction.”
Therefore, based on the configuration of Liu it would be improper to modify the prior art to provide a device in which “the irradiation device has a luminance distribution with peaks in three directions toward points (Xn, Yn, Zn; n=1, 2 or 3) that satisfy the following conditions:
(Direction 1) X1>0, Y1>0, Z1>O and X1>Y1, X1>Z1 direction
(Direction 2) X2<0, Y2>0, Z2>O and IX2|>Y2, |X2|>Z2 direction, and
(Direction 3) X3 0, Y3>O and Z3>0 direction.” Therefore, the combination of features is considered to be allowable.
Claims 6-8 and 10-11 would be allowable for its dependence on claim 5.
Claim 9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Hong (US 11655962 B1): a light entry segment that receives light emitted from a light emitting diode (LED), a total internal reflection (TIR) segment to reflect the light towards an optical axis of the LED, see Fig. 6.
Tarsa (US 20200357966 A1): the lens has a faceted output region, a smooth output surface and at least one reflective surface which reflects light through total-internal-reflection (TIR) toward the faceted output region, see Fig. 12.
Dieker (US 20140016326 A1): a lens for distributing light from a light emitter in a desired asymmetric illumination profile, see Fig. 4C.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUBY L KAUFFMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1738. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am - 5pm EST.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
/RUBY L KAUFFMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
