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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed by the Applicant on 5/21/26 is acknowledged.
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 Proir 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 1-3, 5-8,10-12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker (US 4885663 A, cited previously) in view of Fujieda (JP 2015215949 A, cited previously) and further in view of Malone (US 20200343853 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Parker teaches a light generating system (at least Fig.1, Fig.2, Fig.3, Fig. 5 and Fig.6) comprising one (- - or more - -) light generating devices, two or more optical fibers (Abstract), wherein: the light generating device is configured to generate device light comprising a first wavelength (see in Parker: Different colored fill threads may be used to vary the type or color of light being emitted from the optical fibers. Note: it is well known that different colors have different spectral power distributions) using a light source having a relatively long life, such as a light emitting diode), wherein the light generating device comprises a solid-state light source; the optical fiber comprises an elongated body of light transmissive material, transmissive for the device light
Parker does not teach: n1 curvatures for the optical fibers in a plane parallel to a length axis (A) of the optical fiber, wherein n1>1; wherein the at least part of the optical fiber within the light chamber has a chamber fiber length L2.
However, it is well known in the art to modify the shape and bending of the optical fiber according to desired design.
Fujieda teaches n1 curvatures for the optical fibers in a plane parallel to a length axis (A) of the optical fiber, wherein n1>1 (more than one curvature as shown below) in Fig. 5 (also see Fig.14) as shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
470
499
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
224
259
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and wherein the at least part of the optical fiber within the light chamber has a chamber fiber length L2 (see part of the length protruding out of the chamber; length of the fiber in the “length” direction in the Figure above is considered as the chamber fiber length L2) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the shape as disclosed in Fujieda, in the device of Parker, in order to achieve uniform illumination (Through such a process, the amount of light propagating through the transparent substrate 1 becomes uniform : in Fujieda).
Parker in view of Fujieda teaches all the limitations as claimed excepting two or more light generating units, wherein: the two or more optical fibers and the two or more light generating units, are configured in two or more sets along each optical fiber and one or more light generating devices, wherein portions of the second light escapes the optical fiber from both the elongated outer surface of length L1 and the chamber exit window of the light generating unit of length L2.
However, forming of two or more light generating units, along a length of an optical fiber, thereby extracting light from each of the light generating units are well known techniques in the art.
Malone teaches side emitting optical fiber within enclosures (Fig.1 and 4), and wherein the fibers are connected by length of optical fibers outside of the enclosures, in order to use the configuration for solar collectors and for use in solar systems (see [0066],[0068] ,Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device of Parker in view of Fujieda, in order to form two or more light generating units along the length of the fiber, from the teachings of Malone, in order to extract the light out from each of the light generating units, for use in solar panels. Further, it is a matter of design and desired use of fiber, for example for illumination purposes for those sections that are outside of enclosure 120 (Fig.1 and 4), in order to provide illumination outside of the enclosures, it is a matter of design on the particular use of the light within the fibers that are outside of the enclosures 120 of Malone, in order to achieve desired illumination, since, the modification of the fiber piece for the sections that are outside of the enclosures involves routine skill in the art).
Regarding claim 2, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a light generating system, wherein the solid-state light source comprises a laser (when a laser diode is used for the light source 6: in Fujieda).
Regarding claim 3, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a light generating system, wherein the solid-state light source
Regarding claims 5-8, wherein:
the light chamber comprises an internal chamber length L3 and an internal chamber width W3; wherein L2>(r*sqrt(L3*W3)) (for claim 5) L2>3*(r*sqrt(L3*W3)) (for claim 6); the optical fiber has a fiber diameter, wherein the n1 curvatures have curvature radii, wherein Rc<10*D1 (for claim 7) , comprising k1 curvatures per square centimeter, wherein k1>10 (for claim 8).
Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone already teaches meandering optic fiber and shapes in Fig.7 and 12 (of Fujieda).
Further even more, it is well known in the art to use complex meandering shapes for the optical fiber by simulation and desired design, as disclosed in Fujieda (some of the Figures are shown below):
PNG
media_image3.png
191
142
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
304
197
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
210
271
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
184
186
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
178
196
media_image7.png
Greyscale
(instant Fig.1B and the shape of the meandering of the optical fiber is relied upon in the rejection, since 2 light sources have been recited in claim 1, on which all the above claims are dependent);
And it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to derive the shapes with relations as claimed, by computer simulation and routine experimentation, from the teachings of Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone, in order to achieve uniform lighting (throughout disclosure of Fujieda).
Regarding claim 10, P Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a light generating system, wherein the optical fiber is configured in one or more of a meandering configuration (from teachings of Fig.5 of Fujieda), a stacked configuration, spiral configuration, and an interleaved configuration.
Regarding claim 11, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a light generating system, wherein part of the optical fiber is configured external from the light chamber; and wherein during operation of the light generating device, at least part of the second light escapes from the optical fiber external from the light chamber (from the teachings of Fig.6 of Parker and Fig.5 and Fig. 14 of Fujieda).
Regarding claim 12, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a light generating system, comprising a plurality of light generating units (14 in Parker), wherein at least two light generating units share the same optical fiber.
Regarding claim 14, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a light generating system, wherein the light chamber comprises a cross-sectional shape selected from the group of circular, elliptical, rectangular and n-gonal, wherein n is at least 5; wherein the chamber exit window comprises a diffuser for the second light, wherein the reflective internal surface is diffusively reflective (see in Parker: Also, the back reflector may be a single sheet or film that has a variety of reflectance characteristics to provide the desired specularity, spread, diffusion, or absorption, which is a function of the application).
Regarding claim 15, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches a lighting device selected from the group of a lamp, and a luminaire, comprising the light generating system (from teachings of Parker and Fujieda).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone and further in view of OXman (US 20240141557 A1)
Regarding claim 9, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches the invention above, but is silent regarding: wherein the curvatures are arranged such that an area Ai of the Voronoi cells from a 2D Voronoi tessellation of an area comprising a projection of the curvatures (corresponding to Voronoi points) are selected from the range of 0.7-1.3 times the average area of all the Voronoi cells in the 2D Voronoi tessellation.
Oxman teaches Voronoi tessellation arrangement in optic fibers (Abstract,[0018],[0086],[0088], Also see predetermined range in [0099],[0098]) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the range 0.7-1.3 by routine experimentation where in Oxman already teaches the woven optic fiber in a Voronoi tessellation configuration, in the device of Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone, in order to use the optic fiber system in different products such as a shoe, garment, textile, building material, or engineered hybrid plant product (Abstract).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone and further in view of Hed (US 5301090 A, cited previously)
Regarding claim 13, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches two or more optical fibers and two or more light generating devices (Fig.3 of Parker), configured in two or more sets of each an optical fiber and one light generating device, wherein the light entrance part receives light from these one or more light generating devices, but is silent regarding spectral power distributions of the second light of two or more optical fibers are different; wherein the light generating system further comprises a control system configured to control a spectral power distribution of the system light, wherein the system light comprises at least part of the second light of one or more optical fibers.
Hed teaches spectral power distributions of the second light of two or more optical fibers are different; wherein the light generating system further comprises a control system configured to control a spectral power distribution of the system light, wherein the system light comprises at least part of the second light of one or more optical fibers (controller in Fig.2,5 and 7) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use a light source controller as disclosed in Hed, in the device of Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone in order to control the light sources colors (see in Hed: (47) The operation of the system is straight forward as described for the embodiments depicted in FIGS. 3, 4A and 4B above, whereby the perceived color of the luminaire is controlled by the controller 83).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone and further in view of Kluth (DE 10206613 A1, cited previously)
Regarding claim 4, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches the optical fiber comprises a core
Kluth teaches optical fiber further comprises light outcoupling elements (decoupling means 14 in Fig.4C) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use a decoupling element as disclosed in Kluth, in the device of Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone, in order to increase the scattering capacity.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone and further in view of Ashdown (US 20220287247 A1)
Regarding claim 16, Parker in view of Fujieda and Malone teaches the invention set forth in claim 1 above, but does not teach the control system is configured to control the spectral power distribution of the system light by controlling one or more of the number of curvatures the optical fiber comprises, and the number of light generating units used on a single optical fiber.
Ashdown teaches optical fiber lighting wherein the spectral power distribution is controlled ([0012]-[0020] and side emission of fibers in [0030],[0064],[0079],[0080],[0082],[0083] and lines 4 onwards of [0090]) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the spectral distribution controlling capability in optical fiber systems, in order to achieve the versatility of desired spectral distribution.
Other art
US 20090279017 A1:
PNG
media_image8.png
553
565
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed by the Applicant on 5/21/26 have been considered however they are moot in light of new grounds of rejection. The new prior art Malone teaches the same technique of extracting light from the light generating units, along the length of the fiber, in order to use the fiber in solar panel systems.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatima Farokhrooz whose telephone number is (571)-272-6043. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday, 9 am - 5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, James Greece can be reached on (571) 272-3711.
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.
/Fatima N Farokhrooz/
Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights