Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/771,712

ILLUMINATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jul 12, 2024
Examiner
GRAMLING, SEAN P
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Japan Display Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
738 granted / 1114 resolved
-1.8% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1134
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
47.1%
+7.1% vs TC avg
§102
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§112
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1114 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Claim Objections Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 5-8, Applicant recites “when the illumination devices not subject to the light adjustment control are in the second mode”. However, in claim 1 which claim 17 depends on, Applicant indicated that “a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to the light adjustment control”. Accordingly, did Applicant intend to recite “when the illumination devices not subject to the light adjustment control are in the first mode”?. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-17 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 enablement requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Regarding at least claim 1, Applicant recites in claim 1: “An illumination system comprising a plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control, and a second mode in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, and in the second mode, the illumination device is controlled to be in a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode”. Examiner generally finds the entire claim confusing and vague and the drawings/specification do not help clarify the ambiguity. Applicant recites that the illumination system comprises “a plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function”, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control. Then Applicant recites “a second mode in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, and in the second mode, the illumination device is controlled to be in a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode”. What is the “another illumination device”, and what is “the illumination device”? Is the “another illumination device” one of “the plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Or is the “another illumination device” an illumination device separate from “the plurality of illumination devices”? Similarly, is ”the illumination device” the “another illumination device”? Or one of “the plurality of illumination devices”, or both or neither? Based on the drawings/specification, Applicant appears to have a separate illumination device 1_3 that is different in operation from light sources 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 (see Figs. 17A-17C). Presumably the “another illumination device” is illumination device 1_3? If so, does this illumination device 1_3 have a first mode as well as a second mode, as required by the recitation that “each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Moreover, if the “another illumination device” is illumination device 1_3, how is this illumination device “subject to the light adjustment control and in the second mode, the illumination device is controlled to be in a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode”? The description and Figures 17A-17C appear to describe that illumination device 1_3 is not controlled and maintains the same light emission pattern (see Figs. 17A-17C). It appears that it is illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 that are “subject to light adjustment control” with a “second mode” being a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode (see Figs. 17A-17C, light sources 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 go from lit (Fig. 17A) to either off (Fig. 17B) or dim (Fig. 17C). More confusing, if illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 are lit in the first mode, how are the illumination devices “not subject to light adjustment control”? Did they not have to be activated or controlled to be turned on (i.e. subject to light adjustment control?). Adding to the confusion, claims 2-3 recite “wherein each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode and not lit in the second mode” or “wherein each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode and dimmed in the second mode relative to the first mode”. What is meant by “each of the illumination devices”? Does that include the “another illumination device” of claim 1? Assuming at least illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 are “each of the illumination devices”, the specification and drawings describe either controlling the illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 to go from “on” or “lit” (see Fig. 17A) to either dimmed or off (Figs. 17B-17C). How is being in an “on” state a “first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Is Applicant simply saying that because illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 are “on”, they are not being controlled at that specific time to be dimmed/turned off? And again, it is unclear how the “another illumination device” (presumably 1_3) is “subject to the light adjustment control” when it appears to be the only light source not changing its light emission pattern (see Figs. 17A-17C). Examiner respectfully asks Applicant to explain the claimed invention with reference to the disclosure as originally filed, or otherwise amend the claim. For the foregoing reasons, Examiner submits that the claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claims 2-14 and 17 are rejected under this provision at least based on their dependency on claim 1. Similarly regarding claim 15, Applicant recites “An illumination system comprising a plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function”; “wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control, and a second mode in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode”. Examiner generally finds the entire claim confusing and vague and the drawings/specification do not help clarify the ambiguity. Applicant recites that the illumination system comprises “a plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function”, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control. Then Applicant recites “a second mode in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode”. What is the “another illumination device”, and what is “each of the illumination devices”? Is the “another illumination device” one of “the plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Or is the “another illumination device” an illumination device separate from “the plurality of illumination devices”? Similarly, does “each of the illumination devices” include the “another illumination device”? Or one of “the plurality of illumination devices”, or both or neither? Based on the drawings/specification, Applicant appears to have a separate illumination device 1_3 that is different in operation from light sources 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 (see Figs. 17A-17C). Presumably the “another illumination device” is illumination device 1_3? If so, does this illumination device 1_3 have a first mode as well as a second mode, as required by the recitation that “each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Moreover, if the “another illumination device” is illumination device 1_3, how is this illumination device “subject to the light adjustment control”? The description and Figures 17A-17C appear to describe that illumination device 1_3 is not controlled and maintains the same light emission pattern (see Figs. 17A-17C). It appears that it is illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 that are “subject to light adjustment control” with a “second mode” being a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode (see Figs. 17A-17C, light sources 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 go from lit (Fig. 17A) to either off (Fig. 17B) or dim (Fig. 17C). More confusing, if illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 are lit in the first mode, how are the illumination devices “not subject to light adjustment control”? Did they not have to be activated or controlled to be turned on (i.e. subject to light adjustment control?). Examiner respectfully asks Applicant to explain the claimed invention with reference to the disclosure as originally filed, or otherwise amend the claim. For the foregoing reasons, Examiner submits that the claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Similarly regarding claim 16, Applicant recites “An illumination system comprising a plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function”; “wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control, and a second mode in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode”. Examiner generally finds the entire claim confusing and vague and the drawings/specification do not help clarify the ambiguity. Applicant recites that the illumination system comprises “a plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function”, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control. Then Applicant recites “a second mode in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode”. What is the “another illumination device”, and what is “each of the illumination devices”? Is the “another illumination device” one of “the plurality of illumination devices each having a light adjustment function, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Or is the “another illumination device” an illumination device separate from “the plurality of illumination devices”? Similarly, does “each of the illumination devices” include the “another illumination device”? Or one of “the plurality of illumination devices”, or both or neither? Based on the drawings/specification, Applicant appears to have a separate illumination device 1_3 that is different in operation from light sources 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 (see Figs. 17A-17C). Presumably the “another illumination device” is illumination device 1_3? If so, does this illumination device 1_3 have a first mode as well as a second mode, as required by the recitation that “each of the illumination devices has a first mode in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control”? Moreover, if the “another illumination device” is illumination device 1_3, how is this illumination device “subject to the light adjustment control”? The description and Figures 17A-17C appear to describe that illumination device 1_3 is not controlled and maintains the same light emission pattern (see Figs. 17A-17C). It appears that it is illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 that are “subject to light adjustment control” with a “second mode” being a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode (see Figs. 17A-17C, light sources 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 go from lit (Fig. 17A) to either off (Fig. 17B) or dim (Fig. 17C). More confusing, if illumination devices 1_1, 1_2, 1_4, 1_5, 1_6 are lit in the first mode, how are the illumination devices “not subject to light adjustment control”? Did they not have to be activated or controlled to be turned on (i.e. subject to light adjustment control?). Examiner respectfully asks Applicant to explain the claimed invention with reference to the disclosure as originally filed, or otherwise amend the claim. For the foregoing reasons, Examiner submits that the claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asprey et al (US 11,083,073). Regarding claim 1, as best understood by Examiner, Asprey discloses an illumination system comprising a plurality of illumination devices 112 (see Fig. 3 and col 4, lines 23-28 which teaches that light source 112 can be multiple LEDs) each having a light adjustment function, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode (activation mode, see at least col. 5, lines 4-20) in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to light adjustment control, and a second mode (deactivation mode, see at least col. 5, lines 4-20; alternatively dim mode or color changing mode, see at least col. 6, lines 4-21) in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, and in the second mode, the illumination device is controlled to be in a light adjustment state different from a light adjustment state in the first mode (see at least Figures 1-3 and column 3, line 58 through column 10, line 18). Regarding claim 2, each of the illumination device in Asprey is lit in the first mode (activated) and not lit in the second mode (deactivated) (see at least col. 5, lines 4-20). Regarding claim 3, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is lit in the first mode and dimmed in the second mode (see at least col. 6, lines 8-18). Regarding claim 4, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is lit in a first light emission color in the first mode and lit in a second light emission color in the second mode, the second light emission color being different from the first light emission color (see at least col. 6, lines 8-18). Regarding claim 5, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is configured to repeatedly alternate between a first light adjustment state and a second light adjustment state at predetermined intervals in the second mode (“light schedule”; see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 6, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is lit in the second light adjustment state and lit in the first light adjustment state (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 7, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is lit in the second light adjustment state and dimmed in the first light adjustment state relative to the second light adjustment state (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 8, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is lit in a first emission color in the second light adjustment state and lit in a second emission color in the first light adjustment state, the second light emission color being different from the first light emission color (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 9, the system in Asprey further comprises a control device (at least 116) configured to perform the light adjustment control of the illumination devices, wherein each of the illumination devices is configured to receive a light adjustment assistance control start command (“instructions” to begin a particular mode under a lighting schedule for activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources) from the control device 116 and make a transition from the first mode to the second mode (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 10, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is configured to receive a light adjustment assistance control stop command (again “instructions” to end a particular mode under a lighting schedule for activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources) from the control device 116 and make a transition from the second mode to the first mode (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 11, each of the illumination devices in Asprey is configured to transition from the second mode the first mode after an elapse of a predetermined time since receiving a light adjustment assistance control stop command from the control device (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 12, the system in Asprey further comprises a control device (at least 116) configured to perform the light adjustment control of the illumination devices, wherein when at least one of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control and the light adjustment control of the illumination device is started, the control device causes another illumination device of the illumination devices different from the at least one of the illumination devices to transition (the light source 112 comprises multiple LED’s which are subject to control from a first mode to a second mode) from the first mode to the second mode (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 13, when the light adjustment control of the illumination device subject to the light adjustment control is stopped, the control device 116 cause another illumination device of the illumination devices to transition from the second mode the first mode (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 14, wherein after an elapse of a predetermined time since stopping the light adjustment control of the illumination device subject to the light adjustment control, the control device causes another illumination device of the illumination devices to transition from the second mode to the first mode (see at least col. 6, lines 22-57 for discussion of repeatedly activating/deactiving/dimming/color changing the light sources for predetermined intervals). Regarding claim 15, Asprey discloses an illumination system comprising: a plurality of illumination devices 112 (see Fig. 3 and col 4, lines 23-28 which teaches that light source 112 can be multiple LEDs) each having a light adjustment function; and a control device (at least 116) configured to perform light adjustment control of the illumination devices, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode (activation mode, see at least col. 5, lines 4-20) in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to the light adjustment control, and a second mode (deactivation mode, see at least col. 5, lines 4-20; alternatively dim mode or color changing mode, see at least col. 6, lines 4-21) in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode, and when at least one of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control and the light adjustment control of the at least one of the illumination devices is performed, the control device 116 repeatedly alternates, at predetermined intervals (“lighting schedule can indicate to activate or deactivate the light source 112 at a particular time or times” for a period of time; see at least col. 6, lines 22-57), a light adjustment control period in which the light adjustment control is performed and a turn-off period (deactivation period) in which the at least one of the illumination devices subject to the light adjustment control is not lit (see at least Figures 1-3 and column 3, line 58 through column 10, line 18). Regarding claim 16, Asprey discloses an illumination system comprising: a plurality of illumination devices 112 (see Fig. 3 and col 4, lines 23-28 which teaches that light source 112 can be multiple LEDs) each having a light adjustment function; and a control device (at least 116) configured to perform light adjustment control of the illumination devices, wherein each of the illumination devices has a first mode (activation mode, see at least col. 5, lines 4-20) in which all of the illumination devices are not subject to the light adjustment control, and a second mode (dim mode, see at least col. 6, lines 12-18) in which another illumination device of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control, each of the illumination devices is lit in the first mode, and when at least one of the illumination devices is subject to the light adjustment control and the light adjustment control of the at least one of the illumination devices is performed, the control device repeatedly alternates, at predetermined intervals (“lighting schedule can indicate to activate or deactivate the light source 112 at a particular time or times” for a period of time; see at least col. 6, lines 12-57 which makes clear that the light adjustment control can also include changing color and/or dimming/brightening the light sources 112; “change another light setting for the light source 112 (for example, a color or brightness of the light source 112)), a light adjustment control period in which the light adjustment control is performed and a dimming period in which the at least one of the illumination devices subject to the light adjustment control is dimmed relative to the light adjustment control period (see at least Figures 1-3 and column 3, line 58 through column 10, line 18). 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. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asprey et al (US 11,083,073). Regarding claim 17, Asprey generally teaches that the multiple LED’s “can direct light in multiple different directions” (see col. 4, lines 25-26), but does not specifically teach that each illumination device be capable of controlling a distribution angle of light emitted from a light source as the light adjustment function. However, providing illumination devices capable of controlling a distribution angle of the light emitted is well-known in the art (Official Notice), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to control a distribution angle of light emitted from the light sources 112 in Asprey in order allow for adjustment of the directionality of the light pattern to illuminate particular areas while achieving the stated option of directing light in multiple different directions. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN P GRAMLING whose telephone number is (571)272-9082. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5pm EST. 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, Majeed Aziz can be reached at (571) 270-5046. 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. /SEAN P GRAMLING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 12, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595903
LIGHTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584603
VEHICLE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY WITH PCB-MOUNTED SHIELD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585157
COLOR CONVERSION FILM, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING COLOR CONVERSION FILM, BACKLIGHT UNIT, AND LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578076
Dual-Output Laser-Driven Light Source
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571518
LIGHT SOURCE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
66%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+28.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1114 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month