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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner notes that the claims recited set forth limited structure with recited functions or output, i.e. “a light source string… for generating cyan light and a third luminescent material”. The prior art, specifically Petluri teaches similar outputs and functions and teaches large lists of known materials for achieving said functions and outputs. E.g. Petluri teaches that one of the light source strings emits light in the range that includes cyan, and that each of the light source strings comprises a lumiphore that may be any of the examples in col. 16. The Examiner finds that as Petluri teaches a wide variety of possible combinations, any of these combinations may be relied on to teach the recited elements in the claims.
The Examiner suggests reciting more specific structure or combinations to overcome Petluri.
The Examiner also notes that the tunable aspect of the invention appears to be critical, it is recited in both the title and the disclosure. The limitation “individually controllable” does not set forth the constant color point or the tunable melanopic activity.
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.
Claims 1-9, 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petluri (U.S. 10,477,636) in view of Sagawa (U.S. 12,245,342; filed 10/21/2021 as JP 2021-17621, all references made to the US patent for ease of reference).
Regarding claim 1, Petluri teaches a light generating system (see fig. 1), configured to generate system light, wherein the light generating system comprises a first SSL light source string (106), a second SSL light source string (104) and a third SSL light source string (102), wherein:
the first SSL light source string is configured to generate first light having a first color point and a first correlated color temperature CCT1 (see fig. 7, within 702, 1500k see col. 9 lines 50-55), and which comprises at least one first SSL light source for generating violet and/or blue light (445-490nm, see col. 9 lines 8-17) and a first luminescent material (third lumiphore, see col. 8 lines 45-67),
the second SSL light source string (104) is configured to generate second light (see fig. 4) having a second color point and a second correlated color temperature CCT2 (1700-2900K, see col. 9 lines 40-45), and which comprises at least one second SSL light source for generating violet and/or blue light (see col. 8 lines 31-40) and a second luminescent material (second lumiphore, see col. 8),
the third SSL light source string (106) is configured to generate third light having a third color point and a third correlated color temperature CCT3 (4800-2500k see col. 9 lines 30-35), and which comprises at least one third SSL light source for generating cyan light (cyan is 475-525nm; see col. 9 lines 7-17) and a third luminescent material (first lumiphore see col. 7 lines 60-67),
the first correlated color temperature (1500K) is lower than the second correlated color temperature (1700-2900K),
the first correlated color temperature is lower than the third correlated color temperature (2500k-4800k);
the first SSl light source string is configured to generate warm-white light (1500k), and wherein the third SSL light source string are configured to generate cold-white light (4800k);
the first color point, the second color point, and the third color point are on a straight line in a color diagram (see figs. 3, 4, 7, have regions that have dots on a straight line), and wherein the first color point, the second color point and the third color point do not overlap within 10 standard deviation of color matching (see figures 3, 4, 7, have regions that do not overlap within 10 standard deviation of color matching);
wherein the first SSL light source string, the second SSL light source string and the third SSL light source string are individually controllable (see col. 28 lines 45-54); and
wherein the system light is substantially white light with a correlated color temperature in the range between 2200 - 6500 K (3400 K, see co. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
650
1602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Petluri does not teach that the second SSL light source string generates cold-white light.
Sagawa teaches a second SSL light string generates cold-white light (see fig. 7, 11 and 12 are cold white light strings).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the second light string of Petluri a colder white light to increase the melanopic ratio of the light source as taught by Sagawa to suppress melatonin secretion, see col. 3 of Sagawa.
The wavelength ranges as claimed; lie inside the ranges disclosed by the prior art. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 2, Petluri teaches that the first SSL light source (106) is configured to generate first SSL light having a first dominant wavelength selected from the range of 440-470 nm (445-490nm), wherein the second SSL light source (104) is configured to generate second SSL light having a second dominant wavelength selected from the range of 425-470 nm (420-510nm), and wherein the third SSL light source (102) is configured to generate third SSL light having a third dominant wavelength selected from the range of 470-520 (475-525); wherein (i) X3d>X2d and X3d>Xld, and/or (ii) X3c>X2c and X3c>lc.
The wavelength ranges as claimed; lie inside the ranges disclosed by the prior art. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 3, Petluri teaches that the first light has a first Melanopic Daylight Efficacy Ratio (MDER), wherein the second light has a second Melanopic Daylight Efficacy Ratio (MDER), and wherein the third light has a third Melanopic Daylight Efficacy Ratio (MDER), wherein the second MDER value is lower than the third MDER value (see annotated figure 3, 5, 7, second light is less cold than third light).
Regarding claim 4, Petluri teaches that the third MDER value is larger than both the first MDER value and the second MDER value.
Petluri does not teach wherein at least two of the first MDER value, the second MDER value, and the third MDER value mutually differ at least 0.1.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to have optimized the MDER value of the light sources to differ at least .1 to increase the tunability of the light source. “Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456. Specifically one of ordinary skill in the art would find that increasing the difference of the MDER values enable the light source to have more variation in the MDER of the emitted light from the system.
Regarding claim 5, Petluri teaches a control system configured to individually control the first SSL light source string, the second SSL light source string, and the third SSL light source string (see col. 28 lines 45-54).
Regarding claim 6, Petluri teaches that the first luminescent material or the second luminescent material or the third luminescent material comprises a luminescent material of the type a3b5o12:Ce, wherein A comprises one or more of Y, La, Gd, Tb, and Lu, and wherein B comprises one or more of Al, Ga, In, Sc (see col. 16, Y3Ga5O12:ce).
Regarding claim 7, Petluri teaches that the first luminescent material, second luminescent material, and third luminescent material are substantially identical (each of the lumiphors may be the same or different, see col. 15 lines 62-col. 16 line 30).
The Examiner notes that Petluri teaches encompassing a wide variety of known light sources and lumiphore combinations, the Examiner finds that Petluri teaches combinations wherein the lumiphors are all the same material.
Regarding claim 8, Petluri teaches comprising a fourth luminescent material different from the first, second, and third luminescent material, wherein the fourth luminescent material is configured downstream of the at least one first SSL light source and is not configured downstream of the at least one second SSL light source and the at least one third SSL light source (see col. 15 lines 50-65, lumiphors may contain multiple layers and may contain multiple types of luminescent materials, “one or more lumiphors”).
Regarding claim 9, Petluri teaches that the first, second, and third luminescent material are configured downstream of all of the at least one first SSL light source, the at least one second SSL light source, and the at least one third SSL light source, and wherein there is no other luminescent material configured downstream of the at least one second SSL source and the at least one third SSL light source (see fig. 16).
Regarding claim 11, Petluri teaches that the fourth luminescent material is an orange and/or red light emitting luminescent material (up converting, see col. 15, see col. 24 lines 16-28, see annotated figures 3, 5, 7 above)
Regarding claim 12, Petluri and Sagawa teaches that the third correlated color temperature CCT3 >3000K (2500-4800L), the second correlated temperature CCT2>3000K (up to 2900K, modified by Sagawa to be colder, i.e. higher temperature), and the first correlated color temperature CCT1 <2700K (1500K).
Regarding claim 13, Petluri teaches that the first correlated color temperature differs from the second correlated color temperature and the third correlated color temperature with at least 1000K, wherein all three color points, determined on the basis of 10 degree color matching functions are positioned within 10 standard deviation of color matching (SDCM) of the substantially straight line in the color diagram (see annotated figures 3, 5, 7).
Regarding claim 14, Petluri teaches that the system is a chip on board device (see col. 21 lines 25-40, one or more circuit boards for supporting and providing current to light emitting devices), wherein the chip on board device comprises the first SSL light source string, the second SSL light source string, and the third SSL light source string, the first luminescent material, the second luminescent material, and the third luminescent material (lumiphors may be in direct contact with light sources, see col. 36 lines 25-35).
Regarding claim 15, Petluri teaches that the lighting device is selected from the group of a lamp, a luminaire (lighting system), and a projector device.
The Examiner notes that the terms “lamp” and “luminaire” have been interpreted as “a device that emits light”. The Examiner also notes that claim 15 is an intended use claim. “(T)he recitation of a new intended use for an old product does not make a claim to that old product patentable.” In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Petluri (U.S. 2022/0272806) teaches highly tunable light sources with large combinations of known structures that achieve a large variety of different color temperatures and Melanopic functions. Petluri teaches that each channel is a narrow color rather than combining multiple white colors.
Moon (U.S. 2014/0168965) teaches combining different white color temperatures together with RGB lights to achieve a large amount of different variations and tunability.
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