Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/846,503

LIGHT SOURCE DRIVING DEVICE AND LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Sep 12, 2024
Examiner
VU, JIMMY T
Art Unit
2844
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sony Semiconductor Solutions Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
568 granted / 654 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
677
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
§102
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§112
10.6%
-29.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 654 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Communication filed on 09/12/2024. In virtue of the communication: Claims 1-7 are pending in the instant application. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. The references cited in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 09/12/2024 have been considered by the examiner. 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 § 112 Claims 1-7 recites the limitations that invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. The generic place holders are “light source control unit”, “abnormality detection unit”, “light emitting units”, and “light receiving unit”. There is no evidence that any taught “unit” has produced the results in a verifiable manner to support the idea that a particular configuration is defined by the output claimed as required for a 112(f) claim. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; (b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: (a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181. 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. Claim 4 is 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. The limitations “a first light emission pattern” and “a second light emission pattern” are not shown in the description of Specification. Clarification is required. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by HOSOI (U.S. Pub. 2024/0118400 A1). Regarding claim 1, HOSOI discloses a light source driving device (Figs. 1-12) comprising: a light source control unit (120, Fig. 1) that performs control in which a plurality of light emitting units is divided into a plurality of regions (each of irradiation directions of plurality beams of light is equal to a pixel, par [0047]) in a light source (110, Fig. 1) in which the plurality of light emitting units is arranged, and the light emitting units are caused to emit light for each of the regions (each of a plurality of pixels, par [0048]); and an abnormality detection unit (210, Fig. 1) that detects abnormality of the light emitting units for each of the regions (using at least one of a distance to a reflection point and intensity of reflected light of each pixel, Figs. 5 and 8, par [0046]) based on a light reception signal from a light receiving unit (signal from unit 130 to unit 140, Fig. 1) that generates the light reception signal in accordance with light from the light source (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 2, HOSOI discloses the light source driving device wherein the light receiving unit is arranged at positions having different optical path lengths from the plurality of regions (unit 130 is positioned close to one end of light source 110 and far away from other end of light source 110, Fig 1). Regarding claim 3, HOSOI discloses the light source driving device wherein the light receiving unit is arranged adjacent to the light source, and arranged at a position close to a region at an end of the light source and separated from a region at other than the end of the light source (unit 130 is positioned close to one end of light source 110 and far away from other end of light source 110, Fig 1). Regarding claim 4, HOSOI discloses the light source driving device wherein the light source control unit controls a first light emission pattern in which light is emitted with light amounts of the plurality of light emitting units being aligned (control unit 120 controls a first light emission pattern from light source 110, Fig. 1) and a second light emission pattern in which light is emitted with light reception signals from the plurality of light emitting units being aligned (control unit 120 controls a second light emission pattern from unit 140 with light reception signals from light receiving unit 130, Fig. 1), and the abnormality detection unit (210) detects the abnormality based on the light reception signals in the first light emission pattern and the second light emission pattern (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 5, HOSOI discloses the light source driving device wherein the light source control unit performs control in which the light emitting units are caused to emit light for each of light emission groups including a plurality of regions (control in groups as in Fig. 8), and the abnormality detection unit detects abnormality of the light emitting units for each of the light emission groups (Fig. 8). Regarding claim 7, HOSOI discloses a light emitting device (Figs. 1-12) comprising: a light source (110, Fig. 1) in which a plurality of light emitting units is arranged (each of irradiation directions of plurality beams of light is equal to a pixel, par [0047]); a light source control unit (120, Fig. 1) that performs control in which the plurality of light emitting units is divided into a plurality of regions (pixels) in the light source and the light emitting units are caused to emit light for each of the regions (each of a plurality of pixels, par [0048]); a light receiving unit (130, Fig. 1) that generates a light reception signal (unit 130 generates signal to unit 140, Fig. 1) in accordance with light from the light source; and an abnormality detection unit (210, Fig. 1) that detects abnormality of the light emitting units for each of the regions (each pixel) based on the light reception signal (Figs. 1, 5 and 8). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 is 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, and overcome the 112 rejection as set forth above. None of the prior art teaches “wherein the light source control unit performs control in which the light emitting units are caused to emit light for each of adjacent light emission groups sharing a partial region” (as cited in claim 6). Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY T VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1832. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Regis Betsch can be reached on 571-270-7101. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300. Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2800. /JIMMY T VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604386
LED CONTROLLER, LED DRIVE SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603435
ANTENNA STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588124
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MAXIMIZING THE OUTPUT OF SURGICAL LIGHTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581584
Light Source Monitoring
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581576
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DYNAMIC CONTROL OF 2-STAGE LIGHT DRIVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
87%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 654 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