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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendment received on 12/18/2025. Claims 8-9 have been cancelled, claims 1-7, 10-12 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raring et al. 10,222,474 in view of Ichikawa 2022/0030684.
Regarding claim 1, Raring discloses an automotive lighting device (LIDAR system) comprising: a first light source (first laser beam of laser diode) configured to emit light with a first peak wavelength intended to contribute to a fight lighting function, with the light source including at least a first light emitting diode [abstract] [col 3, l. 56- col 8, l. 18]; at least a second light source ( excited emission ) configured to emit light with at least a second peak wavelength different from the first peak wavelength, the at least one second light source contributing to at least a second lighting function [abstract] [col 3, l. 56- col 8, l. 18]; at least an optical element (bean shaper/beam projector) to project the light of the first light source [col 6, l. 37-40] [col 7, l. 16-21]; at least one sensor (detector) configured to acquire a portion of a reflection of the light project4ed by the optical element in a wavelength comprised between 0.9 and 1.1 times the first peak wavelength [col 7, l. 40- col 8, l. 18]; a processing unit (receiver) configured to control the operation of the light source and to receive data from the sensor [col. 7, l. 45-49] [col. 9, l. 11- col 10, l. 32].
Raring implicitly discloses a “luminous sensor” as optical sensors are used in LIDAR systems, and the system of Raring utilizes a LIDAR system, [abstract] [col 31, l. 65- col 32, l. 19].
Further, while Raring discloses a second light source, Raring does not explicitly disclose that the second light source including at least a second light emitting diode.
Ichikawa discloses a first LED light source (semiconductor light source 202) and a second LED light source (semiconductor light source 204) [10-14] [24-31] that emits different wavelengths. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as Ichikawa discloses, “This prevents the automotive lamp 200 from presenting erroneous information to traffic participants in the vicinity, thereby providing improved safety.” [030].
Regarding claim 2, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Raring further discloses the first peak wavelength is comprised between 470 nm and 500 nm [col 5, l. 15-21].
Regarding claim 3, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitation of claim 1. Raring further discloses the first peak wavelength is comprised between 485 nm and 495 nm (Raring discloses blue light [col 7, l. 50-55] and the wavelength of 485-495 still falls under the blue wavelength. Further regulation is changing for this particular wavelength to be an industry standard to indicate autonomous driving.)
Regarding claim 4, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitation of claim 2. Raring further discloses the first light source includes phosphor configured to add a wavelength peak so that the light emitted by the first light source is white [abstract] [col. 6, l. 14-15] [col. 5, l. 15-21] [col. 20, l. 4-15].
Regarding claim 5, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitation of claim 1. Raring further discloses a third light source contributing to a third lighting function. [FIG 37A] [col. 11, l. 3-32].
Regarding claim 6, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitation of claim 1. Raring further discloses where the first lighting function is daytime running light or front-position light [ col. 5, l. 12-14] [col 14, l. 9-13] [col. 11, l. 55-67].
Regarding claim 7, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitation of claim 1. Raring further discloses where the at least one second lighting function comprises one of passing-beam headlamp function and driving-beam headlamp function [FIG 22B] [FIG 26-27] [col 28, l. 23-35].
Regarding claim 10, Raring discloses an automotive lighting device (LIDAR system) including: a first light source (first laser beam of laser diode) configured to emit light with a first peak wavelength intended to contribute to a fight lighting function with the light source including at least a first light emitting diode [abstract] [col 3, l. 56- col 8, l. 18]; at least a second light source ( excited emission ) configured to emit light with at least a second peak wavelength different from the first peak wavelength, the at least one second light source contributing to at least a second lighting function [abstract] [col 3, l. 56- col 8, l. 18]; at least an optical element (bean shaper/beam projector) to project the light of the first light source [col 6, l. 37-40] [col 7, l. 16-21]; at least one sensor (detector) configured to acquire a portion of a reflection of the light project4ed by the optical element in a wavelength comprised between 0.9 and 1.1 times the first peak wavelength [col 7, l. 40- col 8, l. 18]; a processing unit (receiver) configured to control the operation of the light source and to receive data from the sensor [col. 7, l. 45-49] [col. 9, l. 11- col 10, l. 32].
Raring implicitly discloses a “luminous sensor” as optical sensors are used in LIDAR systems, and the system of Raring utilizes a LIDAR system, [abstract] [col 31, l. 65- col 32, l. 19].
Further, while Raring discloses a second light source, Raring does not explicitly disclose that the second light source including at least a second light emitting diode.
Ichikawa discloses a first LED light source (semiconductor light source 202) and a second LED light source (semiconductor light source 204) [10-14] [24-31] that emits different wavelengths. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as Ichikawa discloses, “This prevents the automotive lamp 200 from presenting erroneous information to traffic participants in the vicinity, thereby providing improved safety.” [030].
Regarding claim 11, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 5. Raring further discloses a fourth light source contributing to a fourth lighting function [ FIG 37A] [col. 11, l. 3-32].
Regarding claim 12, Raring in view of Ichikawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 5. Raring further discloses the solid-state light sources include laser diodes [col 1, l. 40-41].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-7, 10-12have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The Applicant has amended claim 1 to clarify the first and second light sources to be independently, electrically generated sources, thus overcome the rejection of Raring. However, upon further search and consideration, the Examiner has provided a new 35 U.S.C. §103 rejection of Raring in view of Ichikawa. Ichikawa explicitly discloses two distinct light sources (#202, #204) that produce different wavelengths (different colors), thus the combination of Raring and Ichikawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, and its dependencies.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASIFA HABIB whose telephone number is (571)270-7032. The examiner can normally be reached 10-4:30pm.
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, Steve Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/ASIFA HABIB/Examiner, Art Unit 2876
/THIEN M LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights