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 .
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/10/24 was filed in a timely manner; thus, the submission is 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 § 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.
Claim #7 is rejected is indefinite as it is not clear if the recitation “ at least partially ” requires the claimed device to include at least partially encircle”. The applicant is advised that, the use of the phrase “at least partially” is a conjunctive list requiring at least one of each of the listed elements; “at least partially must be used when the intended requirement is to define a structure having at least just part of the cited elements. See Superguide Corp. v DirecTV Enters., Inc., 358 F.3d 870 (69 UPQ2d 1865) (fed. Cir. 2004)..
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) #1, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Hen (U.S. Pub. No, 2002/0180345), hereinafter referred to as "Hen".
Hen shows, with respect to claim #1, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly comprising: an anode (fig. #2a, item 41) (paragraph 0029) having a first end for electrical connection to a positive source of power (fig. #1a, item 11) (paragraph 0030), a second end (fig. #2a, item 611) of the anode in electrical communication with an anode plate member (fig. #2a, item 50) (paragraph 0030-0031), a cathode (fig. #2a, item 42) having a first end for electrical connection to a negative source (fig. #2a, item 12) of power (paragraph 0030), a second end of the cathode in electrical connection with a cathode plate member (fig. #2a) (paragraph 422), the anode plate and the cathode plate separated by a gap so to not contact each other (fig. #2a), an N-type semiconductor (fig. #1b, item 24) having a first side surface positioned adjacent the cathode plate (paragraph 0007, 0008) and secured to the cathode plate, a P-type semiconductor (fig. #1b, item 25) (paragraph 0008) having a first side surface (Below, fig. #Ex1, item P1) (paragraph 0030) positioned adjacent a second side surface (Below, fig. #Ex1, item N1) (paragraph 0030) of the N- type semiconductor (paragraph 0007, 0008) so that the second side surface of the c semiconductor and the first side surface of the P-type semiconductor are in contact with each other to define a PN semiconductor junction (paragraph 0008, 0031), a connection wire (fig. #2a, item 621) extending between the anode and the P-type semiconductor (paragraph 0008) to complete the electrical circuit, wherein the source of power is applied to the anode and the cathode (paragraph 0060) to cause photons of a first color to be emitted from the PN semiconductor junction, a layer of fluorescent positioned to absorb the photons of the first color emitted from the PN semiconductor junction and produce a second group of photons having a second visible color (paragraph 0009-0012).
[AltContent: textbox (P-type Surface; P1)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (N-type Surface; N1)][AltContent: textbox (Ex1)]
PNG
media_image1.png
354
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim #2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hen (U.S. Pub. No, 2002/0180345), hereinafter referred to as "Hen" as shown in the rejection of claim #1 above and in view of SAKANO et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2008/0099727), hereinafter referred to as "Sakano".
Hen substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #1 above.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #2, a method wherein a cover lens for positioning the fluorescent in proximity to the PN semiconductor junction.
Sakano teaches, with respect to claim #2, a method a cover lens for positioning the fluorescent in proximity to the PN semiconductor junction (paragraph 0088, 0097).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #2, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Sakano, which teaches, a cover lens for positioning the fluorescent (39) in proximity to the PN semiconductor junction, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide boundaries that would promoted proper reflective and refractive surface angles, as taught by Sakano.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #3, a method wherein the fluorescent is positioned internally with respect to the cover lens.
Sakano teaches, with respect to claim #3, a method wherein the fluorescent (fig. #8, item 8) (paragraph 0082) is positioned internally with respect to the cover lens (fig. #10a, item 49) (paragraph 0243).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #3, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Sakano, which teaches, wherein the fluorescent is positioned internally with respect to the cover lens, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide boundaries that would promoted proper reflective and refractive surface angles, as taught by Sakano.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #4, a method wherein the fluorescent includes a partial spherical shape within the cover lens.
Sakano teaches, with respect to claim #4, a method wherein the fluorescent includes a partial spherical shape within the cover lens (paragraph 0242).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #4, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Sakano, which teaches, wherein the fluorescent includes a partial spherical shape within the cover lens, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide boundaries that would promoted proper reflective and refractive surface angles, as taught by Sakano.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #5, a method wherein the fluorescent includes a planar shape within the cover lens.
Sakano teaches, with respect to claim #5, a method wherein the fluorescent includes a planar shape within the cover lens (fig. #8, item 8) (paragraph 0082).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #5, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Sakano, which teaches, wherein the fluorescent includes a planar shape within the cover lens, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide boundaries that would promoted proper reflective surface angles, as taught by Sakano.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #6, a method wherein the fluorescent is positioned on an outer surface of the cover lens.
Sakano teaches, with respect to claim #6, a method wherein the fluorescent is positioned on an outer surface of the cover lens (fig. #10, item 49) (paragraph 0243).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #6, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Sakano, which teaches, wherein the fluorescent is positioned on an outer surface of the cover lens, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide boundaries that would promoted proper reflective and refractive surface angles, as taught by Sakano.
///
Claim #7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hen (U.S. Pub. No, 2002/0180345), hereinafter referred to as "Hen" as modified by SAKANO et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2008/0099727), hereinafter referred to as "Sakano", as shown in the rejection of claim #2 above and in view of Shakuda et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2009/0127539), hereinafter referred to as "Shakuda".
Hen as modified by Sakano, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #2 above.
Hen as modified by Sakano, fail to show, with respect to claim #7, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein a cone positioned on the cathode plate to at least partially encircle N-type and P-type semiconductors, the cone being constructed and arranged to reflect photons away from the cathode plate.
Shakuda teaches, with respect to claim #7, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein a cone positioned on the cathode plate to at least partially encircle N-type and P-type semiconductors, the cone being constructed and arranged to reflect photons away from the cathode plate (paragraph 0009, 0014).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #7, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Sakano, with the modification of Shakuda invention, which teaches, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein a cone positioned on the cathode plate to at least partially encircle N-type and P-type semiconductors, the cone being constructed and arranged to reflect photons away from the cathode plate, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide boundaries that would promoted proper reflective surface angles, as taught by Shakuda.
Hen shows, with respect to claim #8, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly comprising: wherein the photons emitted from the fluorescent light emitting diode (100) are in the visible spectrum of light (YAG, 530 to 565 nm ) (paragraph 0012).
Hen shows, with respect to claim #9, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein the photons emitted have a wavelength between 400 nanometers and 700 nanometers (YAG, 530 to 565 nm )(paragraph 0012).
////
Claim #10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hen (U.S. Pub. No, 2002/0180345), hereinafter referred to as "Hen" as shown in the rejection of claim #1 above and in view of Catalano et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2008/0099727), hereinafter referred to as "Catalano" and Kernahan et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2005/0162142), hereinafter referred to as "Kernahan".
Hen substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #1 above.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #10, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including an integrated chip having memory therein for storing illumination sequences for illumination of a plurality of the fluorescent light emitting diodes in a predetermined sequence, each fluorescent light emitting diode is provided with an independent ground for independent operation of each fluorescent light emitting diode.
Catalano teaches, with respect to claim #10, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly (paragraph 0027) including an integrated chip (fig. #13, item 1310) having memory (fig. #13, item 1312) therein for storing illumination sequences (paragraph 0100) for illumination of a plurality of the fluorescent light emitting diodes in a predetermined sequence (paragraph 0100).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #10, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Catalano, which teaches, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including an integrated chip having memory therein for storing illumination sequences for illumination of a plurality of the fluorescent light emitting diodes in a predetermined sequence, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide the ability to create and project save patterns of light, as taught by Catalano.
Hen as modified by Catalano, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #10 above.
Hen as modified by Catalano fail to show, with respect to claim #10, wherein each fluorescent light emitting diode is provided with an independent ground for independent operation of each fluorescent light emitting diode.
Kernahan teaches, with respect to claim #10, wherein each fluorescent light emitting diode (paragraph 0156) is provided with an independent ground (paragraph 0210) for independent operation of each fluorescent light emitting diode (paragraph 0398).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #10, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Catalano, with the modification of Kernahan’s invention, which teaches wherein each fluorescent light emitting diode is provided with an independent ground for independent operation of each fluorescent light emitting diode, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide patterns to be provide on demand from memory devices, as taught by Kernahan.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #11, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein each of the plurality of fluorescent light emitting diodes requires the same amount of forward voltage (30) and produces a different color of photons in the form of visible light when illuminated.
Catalano teaches, with respect to claim #11, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly (paragraph 0027) wherein each of the plurality of fluorescent light emitting diodes requires the same amount of forward voltage (paragraph 0003) and produces a different color of photons in the form of visible light when illuminated (paragraph 0087).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #11, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Catalano, which teaches, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein each of the plurality of fluorescent light emitting diodes requires the same amount of forward voltage and produces a different color of photons in the form of visible light when illuminated, to incorporate a structural condition that would produce even lighting, as taught by Catalano.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #12, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein each of the plurality of fluorescent light emitting diodes produces the same first color of light photons for absorption by the fluorescent.
Catalano teaches, with respect to claim #12, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly (paragraph 0027) wherein each of the plurality of fluorescent light emitting diodes (100) produces the same first color of light photons for absorption by the fluorescent (paragraph 0087).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #12, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Catalano, which teaches, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein each of the plurality of fluorescent light emitting diodes produces the same first color of light photons for absorption by the fluorescent, to incorporate a structural condition that would produce even lighting, as taught by Catalano.
Hen fails to show, with respect to claim #13, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein the first color of light photons is blue.
Catalano teaches, with respect to claim #13, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly (paragraph 0027) wherein the first color of light photons is blue (paragraph 0087).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #13, to modified the invention of Hen as modified by the invention Catalano, which teaches, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly wherein the first color of light photons is blue, to incorporate a structural condition that would produce even lighting, as taught by Catalano.
////
Claim #14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hen (U.S. Pub. No, 2002/0180345), hereinafter referred to as "Hen" as modified by Catalano et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2008/0099727), hereinafter referred to as "Catalano" and Kernahan et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2005/0162142), hereinafter referred to as "Kernahan" as shown in the rejection of claim #10 above and in further view of Lin et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2009/0273004), hereinafter referred to as "Lin”
Hen as modified by Catalano and Kernahan, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #10 above.
Hen as modified by Catalano and Kernahan, fails to show, with respect to claim #14, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including a microelectromechanical systems chip electrically connected to the integrated chip for initiating the predetermined light sequence in response to acceleration of the microelectromechanical systems chip.
Lin teaches, with respect to claim #14, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including a microelectromechanical systems chip electrically connected to the integrated chip for initiating the predetermined light sequence in response to acceleration of the microelectromechanical systems chip (paragraph 0060, 0072).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #14, to modified the invention of Hen and Catalano as modified by Lin’s invention, which teaches, with respect to claim #14, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including a microelectromechanical systems chip electrically connected to the integrated chip for initiating the predetermined light sequence in response to acceleration of the microelectromechanical systems chip, to incorporate a structural condition that would timing and efficiency of the patterning, as taught by Catalano.
////
Claim #15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hen (U.S. Pub. No, 2002/0180345), hereinafter referred to as "Hen" as modified by Catalano et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2008/0099727), hereinafter referred to as "Catalano" and Kernahan et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2005/0162142), hereinafter referred to as "Kernahan" as shown in the rejection of claim #10 above and in further view of David et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 2015/0049460), hereinafter referred to as "David”
Hen as modified by Catalano and Kernahan, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #10 above.
Hen as modified by Catalano and Kernahan, fails to show, with respect to claim #15, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including a global positioning chip for initiating the predetermined light sequence in response to displacement of the global positioning chip.
David teaches, with respect to claim #15, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including a global positioning chip for initiating the predetermined light sequence in response to displacement of the global positioning chip (paragraph 0614-0615).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with respect to claim #14, to modified the invention of Hen and Catalano as modified by David’s invention, which teaches, with respect to claim #15, a fluorescent light emitting diode assembly including a global positioning chip for initiating the predetermined light sequence in response to displacement of the global positioning chip, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide the processor information to determine an orientation in which to display the image depending upon, as taught by David.
EXAMINATION NOTE
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andre’ Stevenson whose telephone number is (571) 272 1683 (Email Address, Andre.Stevenson@USPTO.GOV). The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Zandra Smith can be reached on 571-272 2429. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Andre’ Stevenson Sr./
Art Unit 2899
08/16/2026
/ZANDRA V SMITH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights