Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/746,656

CIRCADIAN LIGHTING SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 18, 2024
Examiner
KING, MONICA C
Art Unit
2844
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
407 granted / 482 resolved
+16.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
494
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§102
42.5%
+2.5% vs TC avg
§112
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 482 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner. 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. Therefore, the limitations recited “creating a profile of a plurality of power settings required to mix an output of the warm channel and the cool channel of the tunable white light fixture to produce light of a desired brightness and a desired CCT; providing information for at least one scene comprising static brightness and CCT levels; providing information for an automatic progression of varying brightness and varying CCT levels designed to mimic properties of the sun's light at predetermined times; providing information for at least one active scene that is set by a user, the at least one active scene comprising varying brightness and varying CCT levels that automatically progress as set by the user…”, as provided in claim 16, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 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 1–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) (or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §112, second paragraph) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention. 1. Indefiniteness of “profile of a plurality of power settings” (claims 1, 4, 5) Independent claim 1 recites “a profile of a plurality of power settings required to mix an output of a warm channel and an output of a cool channel of the tunable white light fixture to produce light of a desired brightness and a desired CCT.” The term “profile” is unclear in scope because the claim does not define, with reasonable certainty, the nature or boundaries of the claimed profile. It is unclear whether the “profile” comprises a data table, a mapping, a mathematical relationship, a set of calibration values, stored configuration data, or another form of representation. Because the claim does not sufficiently delineate what constitutes the claimed “profile,” one of ordinary skill in the art cannot determine the scope of systems that include or do not include such a profile. Claims 4 and 5, which further recite creation and use of the profile, are likewise indefinite for the same reasons. 2. Indefiniteness of “information for a scene” (claims 1–3, 6–14) Claim 1 recites: “information for a scene comprising static brightness and static CCT levels”“information for an automatic progression of varying brightness and CCT levels…” The repeated use of the term “information” renders the scope of the claims indefinite because the claims do not specify what constitutes the information, nor do they clearly define its relationship to the claimed system components. In particular, the claims do not clarify whether the “information” comprises stored data, configuration parameters, executable instructions, or another form of system element. As a result, it is unclear which systems fall within the scope of the claims based on the presence or absence of the recited “information.” Claims 2–14, which depend from claim 1 and further recite scene-related information, are indefinite for the same reasons. 3. Indefiniteness of “human centric tunable white light” (claim 15) Claim 15 recites “wherein the tunable white light comprises a human centric tunable white light.” The term “human centric” is a subjective and relative term that lacks a clear definition or objective boundaries in the claim. The claim does not specify the structural, functional, or operational characteristics that distinguish a “human centric” tunable white light from other tunable white lights. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art cannot determine, with reasonable certainty, the scope of systems that satisfy the “human centric” limitation. For the foregoing reasons, claims 1–15 fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter regarded as the invention and are therefore indefinite under 35 U.S.C. §112(b). Claims 16–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) (or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §112, second paragraph) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention. Claim 16 recites, in relevant part “creating a profile of a plurality of power settings required to mix an output of the warm channel and the cool channel of the tunable white light fixture to produce light of a desired brightness and a desired CCT; providing information for at least one scene comprising static brightness and CCT levels; providing information for an automatic progression of varying brightness and varying CCT levels …; providing information for at least one active scene …; and using a device comprising a plurality of power outputs to produce light of a predetermined brightness and a predetermined CCT level based on the profile … and scene information provided.” The claim is indefinite because it fails to inform, with reasonable certainty, those skilled in the art of the scope of the claimed invention, for at least the following reasons: Ambiguity of the “profile of a plurality of power settings” The claim recites “creating a profile of a plurality of power settings,” but does not clearly define the nature, structure, or boundaries of the claimed “profile.” It is unclear whether the profile comprises a data table, a mathematical relationship, a set of calibration values, a mapping between power settings and resulting output characteristics, or some other form. As a result, one of ordinary skill in the art cannot determine the scope of what constitutes the claimed “profile.” Unclear relationship between “providing information” steps and the claimed device The claim repeatedly recites “providing information” for scenes and progressions without specifying to what entity the information is provided or how these steps are related to the device ultimately used to produce the light output. Because the claim does not clearly associate these “providing information” steps with the device or a controlling entity, the boundaries of the claimed method are unclear. Lack of clarity as to the operative linkage between the recited steps The claim does not clearly delineate how the steps of measuring, creating the profile, providing scene information, and using the device are operatively linked within the scope of the claimed method. In particular, the claim does not make clear whether the profile and scene information are required to be used by the device, or under what conditions such use occurs, thereby rendering the scope of the claimed method uncertain. For the foregoing reasons, claim 16 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter regarded as the invention, and is therefore indefinite under 35 U.S.C. §112(b). Claims 17–20, which depend from claim 16, are likewise indefinite for the same reasons. The claims to not sufficiently definite structure, material or acts for achieving the functional result recited in the claims to reasonably apprise one of ordinary sill in the art for the practice of such scopes of claims. Relevant Prior Art of Record Nishioka (US 2016/0262221 A1) Nishioka discloses a lighting device that changes the hue of emitted light by adjusting a brightness proportion between a first light source and a second light source. The lighting device includes a light source comprising the first and second light sources, and a storage unit that stores control values for causing the light source to output light having the same hue as light output from a light source included in another lighting device. Snook (US 2024/0215132 A1) Snook discloses methods and systems for illuminating occupied spaces. In one general aspect, an illumination method includes driving a first illumination element designated as an illumination-level element and driving a second illumination element designated as a biological element. The method further includes continuously adjusting the driving of the first and second illumination elements to continuously adjust illumination levels and biological effects over time. Lee (US 2016/0227616 A1) Lee discloses a light-emitting diode (LED) driving device that includes a power supply module configured to supply driving power to a light source comprising a plurality of LED elements, an information acquisition module configured to acquire operating data of the power supply module and characteristic data of the LED elements, and a control module configured to control operation of the power supply module based on the acquired operating and characteristic data. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA C KING whose telephone number is (571)270-3429. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri. 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, Regis Betsch can be reached on (571) 270-7101. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /MONICA C KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844 1/8/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604377
LIGHT DRIVER WITH IMPROVED DIMMING PROFILE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602990
APPARATUS FOR LIGHTING CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604384
OLED PRINT HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598679
Load Control Device Having a Controllable Filter Circuit
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598684
LIGHT DRIVER SYSTEM WITH MODULAR CONTROLLER BOARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+6.7%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 482 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month