DETAILED ACTION
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(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 18, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroom (U.S. 2019/0072263) in view of Georgitsis (U.S. 7,950,821) and Wang (U.S. 2008/0089071).
Regarding claim 1, Boorom teaches a light fixture comprising:
a housing comprising a main portion (heat sink 26 with end caps 68) including an opening through which light is emitted (see fig. 13, fig. 7, emission face) and a support portion (mounting ears 96), wherein the support portion is rigidly affixed to the main portion opposite the opening (see fig. 7, affixed using mounting ears 96 and fasteners);
a light assembly (see fig. 13) comprising a plurality of light emitting diodes (led lamps 32) supported on an LED board (pcb 16), the LED board connected to the the main portion of the housing;
a plurality of optics (inner lens assembly 22), wherein each optic is positioned adjacent an associated LED of the LED board; and
Boroom does not teach a support member positioned in the main portion of the housing, the LED board connected to the support member positioned in the main portion of the housing; a holder body secured directly to the support member positioned within the housing by a plurality of fasteners, wherein the holder body is a unitary holder body and comprises a plurality of recesses and each recess supports an optic.
Wang teaches a support member (heat equalizer 24) positioned in the main portion of the housing, the LED board connected to the support member positioned in the main portion of the housing (see p. 0026); a holder body secured directly to the support member positioned within the housing by a plurality of fasteners, wherein the holder body is a unitary holder body and comprises a plurality of recesses and each recess supports an optic.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used a heat equalizer as taught by Wang between the pcb and heat sink of Boroom to increase the heat dissipation to the heat sink and prevent overheating of the light sources, see p. 0026.
Georgitsis teaches a holder body (lens positioners 158) secured directly to the support member (equalizer of Wang, directly connected to pcb) positioned within the housing by a plurality of fasteners (fasteners 170 directly connect 158 to pcb, see col. 12 lines 21-30), wherein the holder body is a unitary holder body and comprises a plurality of recesses and each recess supports an optic (see fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used a lens positioner as taught by Georgitsis to position the lenses of Boroom to reduce light leakage (see col. 15 lines 52-65) and to align the lenses in the correct location for optimum operation (see col. 4).
Regarding claim 2, Boroom teaches a support arm (central structure 100) operably connected to the support portion of the housing and configured to support the light fixture on a surface (support on mounting base 102).
Regarding claim 4, Boroom and Georgitsis teaches that the plurality of optics comprises total internal reflection (TIR) optics (see fig. 10-12 of Boroom, see col. 2 lines 62-65), wherein each TIR optic comprises one end positioned adjacent an associated LED of the LED board and a second end through which light is output (see fig. 10 of Boroom).
Regarding claim 5, Georgitsis teaches that each recess comprises a shape which is substantially similar to the shape of the outer surface of an optic (see fig. 18).
Regarding claim 6, Georgitsis teaches that each recess has a substantially frustoconical shape (see fig. 18, substantially frustoconical, see co. 16 lines 15-18).
Regarding claim 18, Boroom teaches that the support portion has a shorter length than the main portion (see fig. 7, 96 has short length).
Regarding claim 19, Georgitsis teaches comprising an electrical connector (111 of Georgitsis) positioned proximate an end of the support member (positioned near the end of the housing, and proximate to the end of the support member).
The Examiner notes that Boroom is silent as to an electrical connector. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have use da connector as taught by Georgitsis to provide power to the structure of Boroom and enable easy connection and removal without interfering with the mobility of the device.
Claims 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroom in view of Georgitsis and Wang, further in view of Dalsgaard (U.S. 8,801,225).
Regarding claim 7, Georgitsis teaches that the holder body comprises a retention feature (central hole).
Georgitsis does not teach the retention feature adjacent each recess.
Dalsgaard teaches a retention feature adjacent each recess (see fig. 8, resilient fingers 803).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used a retention feature for each recess to individually mount and secure the lenses of Georgitsis to the holder, enabling singular removal and individual arrangement of the lenses. Additionally the snap fit of Dalsgaard removes the need for the additional fastener 170, and provides a desired toolless assembly.
Regarding claim 8, Dalsgaard teaches that the retention feature comprises a snap fit feature, wherein each fit feature secures an associated optic (protruding flange 807 snaps into resilient fingers 803, see fig. 8).
Regarding claim 9, Dalsgaard teaches each optic comprises the complementary feature for engaging the retention feature (protruding flange 807).
Regarding claim 10, Dalsgaard teaches that that each complementary feature provides a snap fit feature between each recess and an associated optic (see fig. 8, snap fit between 807 and 803).
Claims 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroom in view of Georgitsis and Wang, further in view of Sue (U.S. 10,794,580).
Regarding claim 20, Georgitsis and Anderson does not teach comprising an end plate for covering the electrical connector when the electrical connector is not in use.
Sue teaches an end plate for covering the electrical connector when the electrical connector is not in use (cover 116, cover quick plug port when not connected, see col. 3 lines 44-57).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used two electrical connection ports as taught by Sue to enable Georgitsis and Anderson to be daisychained, enabling multiple lighting fixture be directly connected in series. Such use would use the end plate of Sue to prevent internal damage from unused power ports.
Alternatively, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used the plate of Sue to seal the input port of Georgitsis and Anderson when not used, preventing internal damage from an unused power port.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MATTHEW J PEERCE whose telephone number is (571)272-6570. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4pm 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, James Greece can be reached on (571) 272-3711. 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.
/Matthew J. Peerce/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights