Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/663,754

LED LIGHT BEAD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 14, 2024
Priority
Feb 08, 2024 — CN 202410177195.0
Examiner
SENGDARA, VONGSAVANH
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Zhongshan Mulinsen Electronics Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
669 granted / 931 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
1009
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
83.7%
+43.7% vs TC avg
§102
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
§112
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 931 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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)(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. Claims 1-3 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. 20240120448. PNG media_image1.png 627 561 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, fig. 13 of Zhang discloses a LED light bead, comprising a cup body 1352, wherein a first light-emitting assembly 1354, a second light-emitting assembly 1356 and a third light-emitting assembly 1310 are provided on the cup body; the first light-emitting assembly 1354 (par [0133] - green LED 1354) is used to emit green light, the second light-emitting assembly 1356 is used to emit blue light (blue – par [0133]), and the third light-emitting assembly 1310 is used to emit third color light (red LED 1310– par [0133]); the first light-emitting assembly 1354 includes at least a first light-emitting chip 1326 (blue LED chip 1326 – par [0134]), the second light-emitting assembly 1356 includes a second light-emitting chip 1326 for emitting blue light (blue LED chip 1326 – par [0134]), and the third light-emitting assembly 1310 includes a third light-emitting chip 1326 for emitting blue light (blue LED chip 1326 – par [0134]); the second light-emitting chip 1326 or the third light-emitting chip 1326 is also provided with a first phosphor layer (1330 on 1326 in 1310), so that the blue light emitted by the second light-emitting chip or the third light-emitting chip is transformed into the third color light (red) after passing through the first phosphor layer 1330; wherein, the third color light includes red light (red LED 1310– par [0133]). Regarding claim 2, Zhang discloses wherein the first light-emitting chip is used to emit blue light, and the first light-emitting chip is also provided with a second phosphor layer, so that the blue light emitted by the first light-emitting chip is transformed into green light after passing through the second phosphor layer. Regarding claim 3, Zhang discloses wherein the first phosphor layer is spot-coated on the outer peripheral surface of the second light-emitting assembly or the third light-emitting assembly. Regarding claim 8, par [0084] of Zhang discloses wherein the cup body is also packaged with an encapsulation layer covering the first light-emitting assembly, the second light-emitting assembly and the third light-emitting assembly. Regarding claim 9, par [0084] of Zhang wherein the encapsulation layer is a transparent layer, which is formed by any one or more selected from epoxy resin, silicone resin, and silicone. Regarding claim 10, par [0084] of Zhang discloses wherein the encapsulation layer is a diffused powder layer (photoluminescence material layer 230 may comprise a light transmissive (transparent) optical encapsulant, such as silicone material, with the red-light emitting photoluminescence material 230 dispersed therein). Regarding claim 11, fig. 13A of Zhang discloses wherein the cup body is provided with a base, a first positive electrode pin and a first negative electrode pin are arranged on opposite sides of the base, the first light-emitting assembly is attached on the base and are electrically connected to the first positive electrode pin and the first negative electrode pin respectively; a second positive electrode pin and a second negative electrode pin are arranged on opposite sides of the base; the second light-emitting assembly is attached to the base and is electrically connected to the second positive electrode pin and the second negative electrode pin. Regarding claim 12, fig. 13A of Zhang discloses wherein a third positive electrode pin and a third negative electrode pin are provided on opposite sides of the base, the second positive electrode pin is provided between the first positive electrode pin and the third positive electrode pin, and the second negative electrode pin is provided between the first negative electrode pin and the third negative electrode pin; the third light-emitting assembly is attached to the base, and are electrically connected to the third positive electrode pin and the third negative electrode pin respectively. 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang. Regarding claim 4, Zhang does not disclose of wherein the thickness of the first phosphor layer is 1 to 250 μm. In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Zhang invention inherent disclose some unknown thickness, how note that If the only difference between a claimed invention and prior art is relative dimensions, and the device with the claimed dimensions performs no differently than the prior art device, the claim is not patentably distinct. This means that simply scaling up or down, or adjusting proportions, is generally considered an obvious modification unless it results in a new or unexpected functional effect. As such it would have been obvious to form a structure of Zhang comprising wherein the thickness of the first phosphor layer is 1 to 250 μm in order to form a thickness protective layer. Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of KAWANO 20200111766. Regarding claims 5-7, Zhang discloses claim 1. Zhang does not disclose of wherein the second light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of second light-emitting chips connected in series; wherein the first light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of first light-emitting chips connected in series; wherein the third light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of third light-emitting chips connected in series. PNG media_image2.png 298 362 media_image2.png Greyscale However, fig. 9 of Kawano disclose of a LED light bead comprising a light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of light-emitting chips connected in series in order to change the intensity of light without allowing the emission color to change. In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a LED light bead of Zhang further comprising wherein the second light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of second light-emitting chips connected in series; wherein the first light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of first light-emitting chips connected in series; wherein the third light-emitting assembly includes a plurality of third light-emitting chips connected in series such as taught by Kawano in order to change the intensity of light without allowing the emission color to change. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VONGSAVANH SENGDARA whose telephone number is (571)270-5770. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST 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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. 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. /VONGSAVANH SENGDARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 14, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684981
DISPLAY DEVICE
4y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12684953
DISPLAY PANEL AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR, AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677568
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12677560
Display Substrate and Manufacturing Method therefor, and Display Apparatus
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12677474
FinFET Device and Method of Forming Same
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+18.6%)
3y 3m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 931 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month