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 .
Status of the Claims
Amendment filed 31 December 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 12 and 19 have been canceled. Claims 1, 3, 8, 13-16, 18, and 20 have been amended. Claims 21 and 22 have been added. Claims 1-11, 13-18, and 20-22 are pending.
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 subject matter of claim 21, “wherein the opening portion of the first cover is provided in plural,” 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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the subject matter of claims 16 and 21, “wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light” in combination with “wherein the lighting module emits red light,” and, “wherein the opening portion of the first cover is provided in plural,” must find support in the specification.
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 16-18, 20, and 21 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.
Claim 16 recites the limitation, “wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light” in combination with “wherein the lighting module emits red light.” These limitations are not supported together by the disclosure as originally filed. Examiner notes that the instant application is filed as a continuation, not a continuation-in-part, and thus cannot introduce subject matter not supported by the disclosure of the parent application. See MPEP 211.05 B and 1504.20. The disclosure provides support for, “wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light,” at paragraph [0043]. The disclosure provides support for, “wherein the lighting module emits red light,” at paragraph [0045]. The disclosure further provides support for, “The ink particles may have a color different from the color of light emitted from the light emitting device,” at paragraph [0042]. However, the disclosure also provides support for the plurality of light emitting devices emitting light of numerous other colors at e.g. paragraph [0036]. The disclosure further provides support for the lighting module emitting light of numerous other colors at e.g. paragraph [0042]. There is no disclosure of the specific combination of, “wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light” in the same embodiment as “wherein the lighting module emits red light.”
Claim 21 recites the limitation, “wherein the opening portion of the first cover is provided in plural.” This limitation is not supported by the disclosure as originally filed. As best understood by Examiner, the first cover (210) is provided with only a single opening (215).
Claims 17, 18, and 20 are rejected for merely containing the flaws of the parent claim.
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 4, 10, and 16-18, 20, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation, “wherein the ink particle has a color different from a color of light emitted from the light emitting devices.” It is unclear how the ink particle may be so further defined when the second resin layer is selected to include only a diffusion agent and/or a red phosphor, and not an ink particle as permitted in claim 1.
Claim 10 recites the limitation, “wherein a content of the phosphor in the second resin layer is 23 wt % or less, and wherein a content of the ink particle in the second resin layer is in a range of 3 wt % to 13 wt %.” It is unclear how both the phosphor and the ink particle may be so further defined when the second resin layer is selected from only a diffusion agent and/or only one of a red phosphor or a red ink particle, and not both of said red phosphor and said red ink particle as permitted in claim 1.
Claim 16 recites the limitation, “wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light” in combination with “wherein the lighting module emits red light.” It is unclear how the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light when the lighting module emits red light.
Claim 21 recites the limitation, “wherein the opening portion of the first cover is provided in plural.” It is unclear how the opening portion of the first cover is provided in plural. As best understood by Examiner, the first cover (210) is provided with only a single opening (215).
Claims 17, 18, and 20 are rejected for merely containing the flaws of the parent claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to claims 3, 8, 15, and 18, and Applicant’s cancelation of claim 19 are sufficient to overcome the objections to claims 3, 8, 15, 18, and 19 made in the non-final rejection filed 1 October 2025. The objections to claims 3, 8, 15, 18, and 19 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to independent claims 1 and 16 incorporating the allowable subject matter of dependent claims 12 and 19 respectively are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 11, and 15-17 made in the non-final rejection filed 1 October 2025. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 11, and 15-17 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 31 December 2025 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(a)&(b) rejections of claims 16-20 and the corresponding objection to the specification have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (remarks, p. 11) paragraphs [0035, 0042, 0044] provide support for the claimed subject matter. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The identified paragraphs do not provide specific support for an embodiment wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light in combination with wherein the lighting module emits red light. Support for wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light ([0043]) and wherein the lighting module emits red light ([0045]) are only provided individually and among numerous other color choices, never in combination. As far as may be determined from the disclosure as originally filed, the embodiment wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light disclosed at paragraph [0043] has a lighting module that emits blue light, and the embodiment wherein the lighting module emits red light disclosed at paragraph [0045] has a plurality of light emitting devices that emit red light. The disclosure provides support for, “The ink particles may have a color different from the color of light emitted from the light emitting device,” at paragraph [0042]. The disclosure also provides support for the plurality of light emitting devices emitting light of numerous other colors at e.g. paragraph [0036] and for the lighting module emitting light of numerous other colors at e.g. paragraph [0042]. However, there is no disclosure that Applicant had in their possession at the time the application was effectively filed the specific combination of wherein the plurality of light emitting devices emit blue light and wherein the lighting module emits red light.
Applicant's arguments filed 31 December 2025 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 4 and 10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (remarks, p. 11) that the amendments to claims 1 and 16 overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 4 and 10. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The amendments to claims 1 and 16 adding a diffusion agent to the list of materials included in the second resin layer fails to address the indefiniteness of claims 4 and 10. The metes and bounds of dependent claims 4 and 10 are unclear because the breadth of independent claim 1 permits a second resin layer that does not include the materials further limited by claims 4 and 10. The indefiniteness could be resolved by, e.g., adding a limitation to claim 4, “wherein the second resin layer includes the red ink particle,” and adding a limitation to claim 10, “wherein the second resin layer includes the red phosphor and the red ink particle.”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11, 13-15, and 22 are allowed.
Claims 4 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Independent claim 1 has been amended to fully incorporate the allowable subject matter of now-canceled dependent claim 12 and is allowed for the same reasons. See pp. 15-16 of the non-final rejection filed 1 October 2025 for the detailed reasons for allowance. Claims 2, 3, 5-9, 11, 13-15, and 22 are allowed based merely upon their dependency from allowed claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 Christopher M. Roland whose telephone number is (571)270-1271. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-7:00PM Eastern.
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, Yara Green can be reached at (571)270-3035. 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.
/C.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893