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
The amendment filed on 07/09/2025 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. In particular, the claimed subject matter “a wavelength conversion material arranged between the lower portion of the light scattering material and the upper portion of the light scattering material” and “the optical element includes a wavelength conversion material arranged adjacent to the upper portion of the optical element” as recited in claims 28 and 29, must be shown in the drawings or deleted from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claimed subject matter “a wavelength conversion material arranged between the lower portion of the light scattering material and the upper portion of the light scattering material” and “the optical element includes a wavelength conversion material arranged adjacent to the upper portion of the optical element” as recited in claims 28 and 29 are not adequately described in the application as filed.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ott et al. (US 8,564,185 hereinafter refer as “Ott”) in view of Sorg (US 2017/0219171).
Regarding claim 1. Ott discloses a laser beam scattering device (see Fig. 7) comprising: an optical receiving space (a side face 603 of the luminescence conversion module 2, see Figs. 3A and 7, Col. 12; lines 6-15) having a top, bottom, and sides, the optical receiving space including a light scattering material (luminescence conversion element 6 which contains an inorganic luminescent material, see Fig. 7, Col. 9; lines 8-24) having a lower portion and an upper portion, the lower portion adjacent to the bottom of the optical receiving space and the upper portion adjacent to the top of the optical receiving space (see Figs. 6A-7), the optical receiving space configured with a reflective portion (a reflector layer 7 which in the present case is composed of two partial regions 71, 72, see Figs. 3A, 3C and 7, Col. 10; lines 27-64) surrounding the bottom and the sides except for an opening in one of the sides to receive the laser beam; a laser diode device (1, see Fig. 3C, Col. 9; lines 3-7) positioned adjacent to the optical receiving space so as to impart the laser beam into the opening so that the laser beam enters the lower portion of the light-scattering material (2), the light-scattering material configured to scatter the laser beam and emit light from the top (first main face 601, see Figs. 3A and 7, Col. 11; lines 5-10) at least a portion of the light is emitted at a wavelength that is different from a wavelength of the laser beam (for example a laser diode chip emits primary radiation 5 in a first wavelength range, for example in the blue or ultraviolet spectral range and the luminescence conversion element 6 converts primary radiation from the first wavelength range into electromagnetic secondary radiation in a second wavelength range which is different from the first wavelength range, see Fig. 7, Col. 9; lines 8-24); and a heat sink (3, see Fig. 7, Col. 8; lines 66-67) thermally coupled to the optical receiving space and configured to dissipate heat away from the optical receiving space.
However, Ott is silent with respect to the light-scattering material configured to emit light from the upper portion of the light-scattering material at the top of the optical receiving space.
Sorg teaches an optical element (see Fig. 5) that is configured to emit a light from a top surface of an upper portion (an emergence surface 5, see Fig. 5, Para. 0054), wherein the optical element further include a phosphor element (1, see Fig. 5, Para. 0052); the upper portion including features configured to scatter (scattering element 2, see Fig. 2, Para. 0035, 0038, and 0068) the light and an optical homogenizer configured to improve color uniformity of the light and portion of conversion radiation outcoupled overall may be increased.
Therefore, in view of Sorg, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearranges the layer of the optical element so that the light-scattering material is at the top of the optical receiving space for the purpose of outcoupled overall may be increased as suggested by Sorg. One would have been motivated to make this combination to provide an improved the light output.
Regarding claim 2. Ott further discloses comprising a safety device (e.g. wavelength-selective coupling-out reflector 8, see Fig. 7, Col. 11; lines 23-39) positioned to receive any portions of the laser beam that do not enter the light- scattering material.
Regarding claim 3. Ott further discloses the optical receiving space (e.g. primary radiation 5 is not fed into the luminescence conversion element 6, see Figs. 3C and 7, Col. 12; lines 6-15) includes a portion that does not scatter the laser beam.
Regarding claim 4. Ott further discloses the laser diode and the optical receiving space are positioned so that the laser beam enters the portion of the optical receiving space that does not scatter the laser beam (see Figs. 6A-7).
Regarding claim 28. Ott further discloses the optical receiving element includes a wavelength conversion material (a luminescence conversion element 6, see Fig. 7, Col. 9; lines 8-24).
However, Ott is silent with respect to the wavelength conversion material is arranged between the lower portion of the light scattering material and upper portion of the light scattering material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to modify Ott by arranging the wavelength conversion material between the lower portion of the light scattering material and upper portion of the light scattering material in order to effectively mix light, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, rearranging the light scattering material would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4 have been considered but are moot because a new basis of rejection is being applied in response to the applicant's amendment to the claims.
However, regarding applicant's attempts to define the structure of the invention using the instant disclosure (i.e. “FIG. 53D of the present application shows an optical element 4 that includes an upper portion with an optical homogenizer 4c and a lower portion with an optically transparent heat conductor 4b. The optical homogenizer 4c is adjacent to a top of the optical element 4, and the optically transparent heat conductor 4b is adjacent to a bottom of the optical element 4. The optical homogenizer 4c and the optically transparent heat conductor 4b may include scattering features (see, for example, paragraph [0386] of the present application). Ott does not include these features” ), the applicant is reminded that it is the language of the claims what defines the patentable subject matter, not the detailed description of the invention or the drawings. Reading a claim in light of the specification, to thereby interpret limitations explicitly recited in the claim, is quite different from reading limitations of the specification into a claim, to thereby narrow the scope of the claim by implicitly adding disclosed limitations which have no express basis in the language of the claim. In re Prater, 162 USPQ 541 (CCPA 1969). In this case, the language of the claim does not include all the detailed features (e.g. optical homogenizer 4c is adjacent to a top of the optical element 4, and the optically transparent heat conductor 4b is adjacent to a bottom of the optical element 4. The optical homogenizer 4c and the optically transparent heat conductor 4b may include scattering features) as shown in Figure 53D.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-12 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for Allowance: With regard to Independent claim 6, the Applicant has sufficiently claimed and defined the laser-based light source. The Ott reference fails to teach or suggest the claimed pressure-sensitive adhesives, the step of “applying a liquid form of the dielectric reflective material to exposed sides of the optical element using a spray process, and curing the applied dielectric reflective material at an elevated temperature”, or the detailed structure of the optical element configured to emit light from a top surface of an upper portion, wherein the upper portion includes features that scatter the light and an optical homogenizer configured to improve color uniformity of the light, as required by the claim. There is no motivation, absent the Applicant’s own disclosure, to modify the Ott reference in the manner required by the claims.
Claims 18-24 were previously allowed, as indicated in the Examiner’s Statement of Reasons for Allowance in the Non-Final Rejection mailed on April 29, 2025.
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 Tsion Tumebo whose telephone number is 571-270-1668. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 am to 4:00 pm, Monday thru Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached on (571)272-7044. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/TSION TUMEBO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875