DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Benefit & Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for domestic benefit under 35 U.S.C. 365 (c) with PCT/EP2023/076681, which in turn claims foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) with EP 22198350.5. The certified copy for foreign priority has been filed with the Office on 01/07/2025. Accordingly, the earliest effective filing date was recognized as 09/28/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/07/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. In the specific instant Abstract, the legal phraseology “comprises” is used on line 1. Changing “comprises” to – includes – would put the Abstract in proper form.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 4 “a cover” should be changed to – [[a]] the cover – in order to put the claim in proper form. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 6 recites the broad recitation of about 0,5 to 5mm, and the claim also recites about 1 to 3 mm which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation as well as the narrowest statement of about 2mm. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. In order to execute compact prosecution, the Examiner has interpreted about 1 to 3 mm.
Regarding claim 6 on line 5, the term "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). In order to execute compact prosecution, the Examiner has interpreted the limitations following to be not included.
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 [] are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer (CH 715292 A1; listed as Cite No. 1 under Foreign Patent Documents; English machine translation provided by Applicant; hereinafter “D1”).
Re Claim 1:
D1 discloses a cover (transparent cover sheet 1, fastening edges 2, and hinge structure 4; shown in Figs 1-3 and described below) for an elongated light emitting assembly (for optics 7 and housing 8, Fig 3) comprising:
an elongated central portion (1) extending in a first plane (shown in Fig 2 and described in the second-to-last ¶ of Page 20), and
two side legs (2) provided on both sides of the central portion (both sides of 1, shown in Figs 1-3),
whereas the cover (1, 2, 4) is at least partially light-transmitting (described as at least partially transparent on Page 20, on or ~ the third ¶ down from ¶ 0037), and
wherein the side legs (2) are each connected to the central portion (1) via a hinge joint (4) in such a way that the side legs (2) can be pivoted (shown in Figs 1-3) from a first position (shown in Fig 2), in which they extend substantially in the first plane of the central portion (Fig 2), into a second position (shown in Figs 1 and 3), in which they are aligned at an angle to the central portion (specifically included at angle α in Fig 1), and
wherein the central portion (1) and the side legs (2) are made of the same material (described in the last five ¶¶ of Page 20 as same material and in particular PMMA and PC can be used), whereas the material property of the hinge joints (4) differs (described in at least the fourth-to-last ¶ of Page 20), as it is made of a more flexible material (at least the fourth-to-last ¶ of Page 20),
wherein the hinge joints (4) are each formed by a connecting portion which is made of the material of increased flexibility and which connects the central portion (1) to the associated side leg (2) in a materially locking manner (shown in Figs 1-3 and described in the fourth-to-last ¶ as an injection molding process).
With further regard to the hinge joints, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (“PHOSITA”) to recognize D1 as at least suggesting an equivalent material when compared to the claimed different material for the purpose of having material properties sufficient for increased flexibility when compared to the central portion and two side legs (Page 20, last five ¶¶).
Re Claim 2:
The claims depends upon claim 1.
D1 further discloses wherein the side legs (2) are profiled at their end (profiled with fastening profile 5) opposite the central portion (opposite sides of 1, specifically including Fig 3) and thereby form a latching structure by means of which fastening of the cover (1, 2, 4) to a support member (to elements 6) of the light emitting assembly (of 7) is enabled (shown in Fig 3, described in the third ¶ of Page 21).
Re Claim 3:
The claim depends upon claim 1
D1 further discloses wherein the central portion (1) and the side legs (2) are made of PMMA (PMMA described in the fourth-to-last ¶ of Page 20).
Re Claim 4:
D1 further discloses wherein the central portion (1) has a light diffusing effect (described as act as a diffuser in the fourth ¶ of Page 21).
Re Claim 5:
The claim depends upon claim 4.
D1 further discloses wherein the material of the central portion comprises light diffusion elements (described as opal matt in the fourth ¶ of Page 21).
Re Claim 6:
The claim depends upon claim 3.
D1 further discloses wherein the central portion (1) has a thickness of about 1 to 3 mm (described as about 1-2 mm in the fifth ¶ of Page 21).
Re Claim 10:
The claim depends upon claim 1.
D1 further discloses wherein the central portion (1) and the side legs (2) are formed such that the cover (1, 2, 4) can be rolled up about an axis oriented substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal extension of the cover (described in the second-to-last ¶ of Page 20) in a state in which the side legs (2) assume the first position (position in Fig 2).
Re Claim 11:
The claim depends upon claim 1.
D1 further discloses wherein the side legs are not light-transmitting (described as inner sides of fastening edges 2 are preferably designed to be reflective in the fourth ¶ of Page 20 of Page 21).
Re Claim 12:
The claim depends upon claim 1.
D1 further discloses wherein the cover (1, 2, 4) is manufactured in a multi-component extrusion process (described in the third ¶ down from ¶ 0025 on Page 19 with the description extrusion process, the hinge structures being produced in a separate step).
Further, the limitations of the claim are Product-By-Process limitations to produce the product of a cover. Upon careful consideration, the limitations are unpatentable under MPEP § 2113, because PHOSITA would not have recognized a difference between D1’s disclosed cover when compared with the claimed cover.
Re Claim 13:
The claim depends upon claim 1 and is written in independent form.
D1 further discloses an elongated light emitting assembly (optics 7 and housing 8) having a support member (housing 8, specifically including profile elements 10) extending in a longitudinal direction (direction from one side leg (2) to the other) for receiving lighting means (described in the fourth ¶ of Page 21 as illuminate can be held, for example, by further profile elements 10), the support member (8) having an opening (shown in Fig 3) extending in the longitudinal direction (shown in Fig 3), and a cover (1, 2, 4) closing the opening of the support member (due to the configuration shown in Fig 3) according to claim 1 (claim 1, above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 are 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.
Below is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Re Claim 7:
The closest prior art of record (D1) fails to disclose or suggest the combined structure and functionality of the deflection of the side legs is limited to a maximum angle.
Re Claims 8-9:
The claims contain allowable subject matter due to their dependence on intervening claim 7.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Siltanen (US 20190226662 A1; US Publication of EP 3514449 A1, that was listed as Cite No. 2 under Foreign Patent Documents in the IDS filed on 01/07/2025) discloses a cover for an elongated light emitting assembly.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH G DELAHOUSSAYE whose telephone number is (469)295-9088. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00 am-5:00 pm CST.
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 at (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.
KEITH G. DELAHOUSSAYE JR.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/KEITH G. DELAHOUSSAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights