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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-10 and 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zettler et al (US Patent 5560245).
Regarding claim 1, Zettler et al teach (Figs. 1-3) An optical module, comprising: a substrate (52); a light emitter (64) coupled to the substrate; an enclosure (12), coupled to the substrate over the light emitter, comprising a flat optical surface (26); a first flat handling surface (vertical section of element 14 to the right side of element 66) directly adjacent the flat optical surface; and a second flat handling surface (vertical portion of 14 to the left of element 18 shown in figure 3) opposite and parallel to the first flat handling surface; wherein: a first plane defined by the substrate intersects a second plane defined by the optical surface; light emitted (light emitted by element 64) from the light emitter that travels through the flat optical surface defines an obtuse or acute angle between the light and the flat optical surface; the first flat handling surface and the second flat handling surface are transverse to the flat optical surface; and a first length (an arbitrary lengths that is greater than 0 cm e.x. 1nm) of the first flat handling surface is less than a second length (a second unit which is twice as first length ex 0.2 nm) of the second flat handling surface.
Regarding claim 2, Zettler et al teach the second length (this is understood as unit in length for example cm / inch) is between the substrate and the flat optical surface. That is, there exist a second length 0.2nm between the flat surface (26) and the substrate (52). Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 4, Zettler et al teach the first flat handling surface and the second flat handling surface are parallel to each other. That is, the two vertical surfaces (one to the left of element 18 and the other one labelled element 14) are vertical which are parallel to each other. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 5, Zettler et al teach at least a portion (34) of the enclosure is optically transmissive.
Regarding claim 8, Zettler et al teach a lens (34) that shapes the light emitted from the light emitter.
Regarding claim 9, Zettler et al teach the lens (38) is coupled to the enclosure. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 10, Zettler et al teach the enclosure functions as a lens (34) that shapes the light emitted from the light emitter.
Regarding claim 12, Zettler et al teach the light emitter is electrically coupled to one or more conductive pads or traces on the substrate via one or more wire. That is, element 48, which originates from or end on element 52, is connected to trace 101.
Regarding claim 13, Zettler et al teach the enclosure is coupled to the substrate by adhesive. That is, the “molded” in place refereed to in the specification is construed as adhesion.
Regarding claim 14, Zettler et al teach the substrate comprises a ceramic, a printed circuit (see abstract – printed circuit board) board, or a flexible circuit. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 15, Zettler et al teach a portion of the enclosure is doped with a particle that is not optically transmissive. That is, plastic enclosure housing (see col. 2 line 49) is not optical transmissive of all the wavelength which blocks some light in the visible light spectrum. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 16, Zettler et al teach (Figs. 1-3) an electronic device, comprising: a cover (26) ; and an optical module coupled to the cover, comprising: a substrate (52); a light emitter (38) coupled to the substrate; and an enclosure (14), coupled to the substrate over the light emitter, comprising a flat optical surface (see figure 2); a first flat handling surface (vertical portion of surface 14 to the right side of element 66) directly adjacent the flat optical surface; and a second flat (vertical surface of element 14 to the left of element 18) handling surface opposite and parallel to the first flat handling surface; wherein: a first plane defined by the substrate intersects a second plane defined by the optical surface; light emitted from the light emitter (64) that travels through the flat optical surface defines an obtuse or acute angle between the light and the flat optical surface; the first flat handling surface defines a first right angle between the first flat handling surface and the second plane where the first flat handling surface intersects the second plane; the second flat handling surface defines a second right angle between the second flat handling surface and the second plane where the second flat handling surface intersects the second plane; and a first length of the first flat handling surface is less than a second length of the second flat handling surface.
Regarding claim 17, Zettler et al teach (processing circuitry – col. 4, line 14) the substrate is connected to one or more processing units, input/output components, communication components, or non-transitory storage media. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 18, Zettler et al teach the substrate is connected via a flexible circuit (see bent wiring shown in figure 3).
Claim(s) 1, 3, 11, 16, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shibuya et al (US Patent 5841128).
Regarding claim 1, Shibuya et al teach an optical module, comprising: a substrate (1); a light emitter (3) coupled to the substrate; an enclosure, coupled to the substrate over the light emitter, comprising a flat optical surface (6); a first flat handling surface (the portion of element 10 to the left of element 6 and overlaps with element 6 in the x-axis, which is parallel with element 9) directly adjacent the flat optical surface; and a second flat handling surface (the portion of element 10 to the right hand side of element 6) opposite and parallel to the first flat handling surface; wherein: a first plane defined by the substrate intersects a second plane defined by the optical surface; light emitted from the light emitter that travels through the flat optical surface defines an obtuse or acute angle between the light and the flat optical surface; the first flat handling surface and the second flat handling surface are transverse to the flat optical surface; and a first length of the first flat handling surface is less than a second length of the second flat handling surface. That is the first length is defined as the left hand portion that overlaps with element 6 in the X axis while the second length is the portion of the right hand portion of element that does not overlap with element 6 in the X-axis.
Regarding claim 3, Shibuya et al teach the first flat handling surface and the second flat handling surface are transverse to the substrate (1). That is, element 1 is shown as diagonally situated which intersects with the first and second flat handling surfaces defined above. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 11, Shibuya et al teach (col. 4, line 1) the light emitter comprises light emitting diode. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Regarding claim 13, Shibuya et al teach the light emitter comprises at least one of LED.
Regarding claim 16, Shibuya et al teach An electronic device, comprising: a cover (99); and an optical module coupled to the cover, comprising: a substrate (91); a light emitter (92) coupled to the substrate; and an enclosure (97), coupled to the substrate over the light emitter, comprising a flat optical surface (94); a first flat handling surface (left surface of 97) directly adjacent the flat optical surface; and a second flat handling surface (right surface of 97) opposite and parallel to the first flat handling surface; wherein: a first plane defined by the substrate intersects a second plane defined by the optical surface; light emitted from the light emitter that travels through the flat optical surface defines an obtuse or acute angle between the light and the flat optical surface; the first flat handling surface defines a first right angle between the first flat handling surface and the second plane where the first flat handling surface intersects the second plane; the second flat handling surface defines a second right angle between the second flat handling surface and the second plane where the second flat handling surface intersects the second plane; and a first length of the first flat handling surface is less than a second length of the second flat handling surface.
Regarding claim 19, Shibuya et al teach thin film (23) optical filter coupled to the enclosure.
Regarding claim 20, Shibuya et al teach (col. 6, lines 16-40) the thin-film optical filter transmits a first wavelength of light while blocking a second wavelength of light. That is, the aluminum film blocks below 100 nm into the IR range and low transmittance in the near-UV regions. Where specifically are the claim limitations located in the reference?
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 6, prior art of record does not teach a flat surface that: is adjacent the flat optical surface; is parallel to the substrate; is contiguous with the flat optical surface; and forms a corner with the flat optical surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY KO whose telephone number is (571)272-1926. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5pm.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/TONY KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
TK