DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/24 has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on the second line of the paragraph entitled "CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS", the word --to-- should be inserted at the end of the line after the word "priority". On the second line of paragraph [0005], the word --the-- should be inserted before "drawings". On line 3 of paragraph [0011], "10" should be changed to --100--. On the first line of paragraph [0013], the word "with" should be changed to --as--, and note that the same change should also be made on the first line of paragraph [0015], on lines 1 and 6 of paragraph [0038], and on the second line of paragraph [0044]. On line 4 of paragraph [0017], the word "both" should be changed to --opposite-- or --first and second--. On line 3 of paragraph [0018], "an error of" should be changed to --the difference between--. On the first line of paragraph [0019], "10" should again be changed to --100--, and note that the same change should also be made on the first line of paragraph [0025]. On line 5 of paragraph [0032], the second occurrence of "a" should be changed to --an--. On the first line of paragraph [0035], the word "in" at the end of the line should be changed to --at--, and note that the same change should also be made on the first line of paragraph [0039]. On line 3 of paragraph [0039], the word "both" should again be changed to --opposite-- or --first and second--, and note that the same change should also be made on the second line of paragraph [0040]. On lines 4, 5 and 7 of paragraph [0040], the word "disadvantageously" should be changed to
--undesirably--. On the first line of paragraph [0041], the word "in" should again be changed to --at--. On the first line of paragraph [0042], "a timing chart" should be changed to --the timing chart--. On the second line of paragraph [0043], the word "in" should again be changed to --at--, and note that the same change should also be made on the first line of paragraph [0046]. On the last line of paragraph [0047], the word "both" should again be changed to either --opposite-- or --first and second--. On the penultimate line of paragraph [0052], the word "kept" should be changed to
--maintained--. On line 7 of paragraph [0053], the word --level-- should be inserted after "overcurrent". On the first line of paragraph [0054], the word "in" should again be changed to --at--. On line 5 of paragraph [0058], the second occurrence of the word "in" should again be changed to --at--. On the last line of paragraph [0060], the word "more" should be changed to --further--. On line 5 of paragraph [0062], "to output" should be changed to --and outputs--. On the second line of paragraph [0064], "a timing chart" should again be changed to --the timing chart--. On line 7 of paragraph [0065], the word --and-- should be inserted before "thus". On the first two lines of paragraph [0068], "has been lowered" should be changed to --has decreased--. On the first line of paragraph [0069], the word "lowered" should be changed to --decreased--. On the second line of paragraph [0070], the word "kept" should be changed to --maintained--. On the last line of paragraph [0071], the word "notified" should be changed to --transmitted--. On the penultimate line of paragraph [0072], "without depending on" should be changed to
--independent of--. On line 5 of paragraph [0074], "a" should be changed to --the--. On the first line of paragraph [0075], --in the LED driving device-- should be inserted after the word "incorporated", and note that the same insertion should also be made on the last line of this paragraph, again after the word "incorporated". On line 6 of paragraph [0077], a comma should be inserted after the word "element", and on line 7 of this paragraph, the word "both" should again be changed to either --opposite-- or --first and second-- (and note that the same change should also be made on line 3 of paragraph [0082]).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 4 of claim 1, a comma should be inserted after the word "element". Also in claim 1, on line 6 thereof, the word "both" should be changed to --first and second--.
On line 3 of claim 6, the word "both" should again be changed to either --opposite-- or
--first and second--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
6. 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.
Claims 5 and 6 are 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.
In claim 5, the limitation recited on the last three lines is not understood, in particular the recitation "is switched" on the last line of claim 5, i.e., it cannot be determined what "is switched" is referring to. It appears that applicant is trying to recite that a determination is made whether to recover from a protected state after the overcurrent has been detected according to information sent by the microcomputer to the communication unit (i.e., it appears that the word "set" on the penultimate line of claim 5 is a typo). In response to this office action, applicant should amend the limitation recited on the last three lines of claim 5 in order to make clear what is meant here.
In claim 6, on line 5-6, the recitation of "a front stage side" of the amplifier is not understood, i.e., it appears that applicant simply means that the overcurrent detection unit is a comparator connected to an output of the amplifier, which is how this limitation will be interpreted by the examiner for purposes of applying prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (USPAP 2021/0227664) in view of Lee (USP 11,272,591).
As to claim 1, Li et al discloses, in figure 2,
a light emitting element driving device (the combination of circuits 23 and 25) configured to drive a light emitting element (the string of light emitting elements shown in figure 2 directly to the right of circuit 23), the light emitting element driving device comprising:
a switch driving unit (25) configured to drive a switch (Q2) connectable to a negative end of the light emitting element (note that the drain terminal of Q2 is indirectly connected to the negative end VLED- of the light emitting element, i.e., transistor Q2 is connected to the negative end of the light emitting element via the series connection of diode D2 and inductor coil Ns2), a positive end of which is grounded (note that the positive end of the string of LEDs is connected directly to ground).
Not disclosed by Li et al are the limitations recited on the last five lines of claim 1, i.e., an overcurrent detection unit configured to detect an overcurrent based on a voltage generated across first and second ends of a current detection resistor connected to a negative side of the switch, wherein the switch driving unit is configured to switch the switch to an off state when the overcurrent detection unit detects the overcurrent. These limitations would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, the reason being that (1) Li et al does in fact disclose a resistor (Rs) connected to the negative side of the switch Q2, and (2) it was old and well-known in the art of LED driving devices, before the effective filing date of applicant's invention, to include an overcurrent detection unit configured to detect an overcurrent based on a voltage generated across first and second ends of a current detection resistor connected to a negative side of the switch, wherein the switch driving unit is configured to switch the switch to an off state when the overcurrent detection unit detects the overcurrent, note figure 1 of Lee, supra, as one example of this well-known concept, note that Lee’s figure 1 shows a current detection resistor (resistor 128) together with an overcurrent detection unit (the combination of circuit elements 132, 134, 140, 142, 144 and 146) wherein the overcurrent detection unit is configured to detect an overcurrent based on a voltage generated across first and second ends of a current detection resistor connected to the negative side of the switch, wherein the switch driving unit is configured to switch the switch to an off state when the overcurrent detection unit detects the overcurrent. The motivation for incorporating such an overcurrent detection unit into the light emitting element driving device of Li et al is so that the Li et al light emitting element driving device would be protected against an overcurrent which could damage the LEDs if such a potential overcurrent was not detected and compensated for.
As to claim 2, to the extent not disclosed by Li et al or Lee, the use of a recovery control unit to control Li et al's switch driving unit 25 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art who would have easily recognized that after transistor Q2 is switched off in response to an overcurrent, it should obviously be switched back on when the overcurrent condition has ended, and one known way of ensuring that the overcurrent condition no longer exists this is to simply wait a predetermined standby time after the occurrence of the overcurrent condition.
As to claim 5, one of ordinary skill in the art also would have easily recognized that controller 130 of Lee will typically include a microcomputer and a communication unit which function together to determine whether to recover from a protected state after the above-noted overcurrent has been detected, i.e., using the above-noted obvious recovery control unit.
As to claim 6, the claimed amplifier and comparator read on current sense amplifier 132 and comparator 134, respectively, shown in figure 1 of Lee, i.e., the claimed overcurrent detection unit can alternatively be read on just comparator 134 shown in figure 1 of Lee, thus meeting the limitation that the overcurrent detection unit is a comparator connected to the output of the amplifier.
As to claim 7, the claimed light emitting element is again the string of light emitting elements shown in Li et al’s figure 2 directly to the right of circuit 23, the claimed switch is again transistor Q2, and the claimed current detection resistor is again resistor Rs, i.e., it will be a current detection resistor when the overcurrent detection unit of Lee is incorporated into the figure 2 light emitting element driving device of Li et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 3 and 4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the prior art of record, including Li et al and Lee, supra, discloses or suggests the light emitting element driving device of claim 1 with the further limitations of a power short-circuit detection unit configured to compare a voltage at the negative end of the light emitting element with a power short-circuit detection threshold value, wherein the switch driving is configured to keep the switch in the off-state while the power short-circuit detection unit detects a power short-circuit after the overcurrent detection unit has detected the overcurrent, as recited in claim 3. Claim 4 is allowable in view of its dependency on allowable claim 3.
Prior Art Not Relied Upon
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Figure 2 of Zhang et al and figure 6 of Yu disclose further examples of light emitting element driving devices which include overcurrent detection units for detecting an overcurrent and, in response to such overcurrent detection, a switch is switched to an off state, similar to the above-noted disclosure in Lee.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH B WELLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-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, REGIS BETSCH, can be reached at (571)270-7101. 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.
/KENNETH B WELLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2842 March 20, 2026