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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/19/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the semiconductor elements for the targeted generation of pixels of a light distribution of Claim 2 lines 1-2, the shielding being part of the fastening means of Claim 10 lines 1-2, the vehicle of Claim 14 line 1, the clamping of Claim 15 lines 1-3, and the latching of Claim 15 lines 1-3, and the metallized portion of the fastening means of Claim 17 lines 1-2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 line 1 “wherein the retaining arrangement” should be --wherein a retaining arrangement--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “fastening means” in claim 1 line 3, understood by the examiner to be a means for fastening, with support in the Specification paragraph 26 to be a carrier frame, and
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
With regards to Claim 4, lines 1-3 recite the limitation “wherein the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected in a non-detachable manner, in particular by means of insert molding”, and Claim 16, which depends from Claim 4, recites on lines 1-2 the limitation “wherein the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected by insert molding”. 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 4 recites the broad recitation “the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected in a non-detachable manner”, and the claim also recites “in particular by means of insert molding” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. 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. It appears that either (1) Claim 4 does not require the limitation that the retaining arrangement is effected by means of insert molding and such limitation should be removed from the claim for clarity, or (2) Claim 4 requires the limitation that the retaining arrangement is effected by means of insert molding, and Claim 16, which depends from Claim 4, does not further limit the claim and would be subject to a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d). For the purpose of examination, the examiner understands the scope of Claim 4 such that the limitation of the retaining arrangement of the shielding being effected by means of insert molding is required by the claim. The applicant is encouraged to clarify in the claims whether such limitation is required by the scope of Claim 4 (e.g., “the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected in a non-detachable manner by means of insert molding”) or whether the claim does not require the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means to be effected by means of insert molding (e.g. “the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected in a non-detachable manner), and further notes the limitation that the retaining arrangement is effected by means of insert molding is not given patentable weight in the product claim and the applicant is encouraged to contemplate including a structural limitation in the claim language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Please see the above discussion of the rejections of Claims 4 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above. The examiner notes that, as best understood by the examiner, Claim 4 includes the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means being effected by means of insert molding, and Claim 16 merely duplicates this limitation without adding to the scope. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Applications filed after March 15th 2013
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 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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1, 3, 9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sato et al. (US 2023/0097767).
With regards to Claim 1, Sato et al. discloses a lighting device for a vehicle, the lighting device comprising: at least one light source [52,30] (see paragraph 80 and Figure 1); a fastening means [40] (see paragraph 77 and Figure 3); a control device [60] arranged to control the at least one light source (see paragraph 85); and a shielding [90] positioned to electromagnetically shield the control device [60] or parts of the control device [60] (see paragraph 101), wherein the shielding [90] is arranged to be held on the fastening means [40] (see paragraph 101).
With regards to Claim 3, Sato et al. discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Sato et al. further discloses a retaining arrangement of the shielding [90] on the fastening means [40] is effected in a releasable manner (see paragraph 101; the shielding [90] may be fixed to the fastening means [40] by screwing, which is substantially a releasable manner).
With regards to Claim 9, Sato et al. discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Sato et al. further discloses the shielding [90] contains or consists of an electrically conductive material (see paragraph 101).
With regards to Claim 15, Sato et al. discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 3.
Sato et al. further discloses a retaining arrangement of the shielding [90] on the fastening means [40] is one or more of a screw connection, clamping and latching (see paragraph 101; such arrangement may be a screw connection).
Claims 1, 5, 8, 10-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Biebl (WO 2010000614; please see attached translation for reference to pages).
With regards to Claim 1, Biebl discloses a lighting device for a vehicle, the lighting device comprising: at least one light source [500] (see bottom of page 6); a fastening means [200] (see bottom of page 4 and Figure 1); a control device [400] arranged to control the at least one light source [500] (see top of page 7 and Figure 1); and a shielding (comprising the metallized layer on portion [211] of the fastening means, see middle of page 6 and Figure 1) positioned to electromagnetically shield the control device [400] or parts of the control device [400] (see middle of page 6), wherein the shielding is arranged to be held on the fastening means (see middle of page 6).
With regards to Claim 5, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl further discloses the control device [400] comprises at least one printed circuit board (see top of page 6).
With regards to Claim 8, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl further discloses the fastening means contains or consists of a plastic material (see top of page 4).
With regards to Claim 10, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl further discloses the shielding is part of the fastening means
(see middle of page 6).
With regards to Claim 11, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl further discloses the light source [500] is arranged on the printed circuit board (see bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 and Figure 11).
With regards to Claim 12, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl further discloses optics adapted to shape light emitted by the at least one light source [500] (see top half of page 7 and Figure 1).
With regards to Claim 13, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl further discloses a heat sink [100] adapted to dissipate the heat emitted by the at least one light source [500] to the environment (see middle of page 5 and Figure 1).
With regards to Claim 14, Biebl discloses a vehicle (see top of page 2; disclosure of a vehicle headlight substantially includes disclosure of a vehicle comprising the headlight) comprising at least one lighting device according to Claim 1 (please see the above discussion of the disclosure of Biebl pertaining to the limitations of Claim 1).
With regards to Claim 17, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 10.
Biebl further discloses the shielding is part of the fastening means by metallizing a portion of the fastening means (see middle of page 6).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Biebl (WO 2010000614; please see attached translation for reference to pages) in view of Feil et al. (US 2019/0063706).
With regards to Claim 2, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl does not explicitly disclose the light source comprises semiconductor elements for the targeted generation of pixels of a light distribution.
Feil et al. teaches the light source comprises semiconductor elements for the targeted generation of pixels of a light distribution (see paragraphs 15 and 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the light source of Biebl to comprise semiconductor elements for the targeted generation of pixels of a light distribution as taught by Feil et al. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a matrix arrangement of light sources (see Feil et al. paragraph 15).
Claims 4, 6, 7, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Biebl (WO 2010000614; please see attached translation for reference to pages).
With regards to Claims 4 and 16, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl does not explicitly disclose the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected in a non-detachable manner, in particular by means of insert molding. However, Biebl does disclose using a metallization to form the shielding on the fastening means (see Biebl middle of page 6), and forming the fastening means in one piece by injection molding (see Biebl top of page 4). The examiner further notes that the limitation that the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means being effected by means of insert molding is a product-by-process limitation not given patentable weight in this product claim, and the teachings of Biebl substantially support the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means being capable of being formed by means of insert molding. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to form the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means in a non-detachable manner, in particular by means of insert molding in order to facilitate a formation of the retaining arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lighting device of Biebl such that the retaining arrangement of the shielding on the fastening means is effected in a non-detachable manner, in particular by means of insert molding. One would have been motivated to do so in order to facilitate the process of forming the fastening means with the shielding.
With regards to Claims 6 and 7, Biebl discloses the lighting device as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Biebl does not explicitly disclose the shielding has at least one contact means, it being possible to establish contact between the shielding and the control device by means of the at least one contact means, as in Claim 6, and the at least one contact means is a spring contact suitable for establishing a detachable contact between the shielding and the control device. However, Biebl does disclose utilizing at least one contact means [450] being a spring contact (see Biebl bottom of page 7), being arranged in recess [219] of the fastening means, and providing a connection between the heat sink [100] and control device [400] (see Biebl top half of page 6), the heat sink [100] cooperates to provide a shielding for the control device (see Biebl top of page 3), the shielding is a metallization of the inside of the side wall [211] of fastening means section [210] (see Biebl middle of page 6), and the metallization forming the shielding provides a connection to the ground reference potential of the operating circuit (see Biebl middle of page 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the shielding to have at least one contact means, it being possible to establish contact between the shielding and the control device by means of the at least one contact means, and the at least one contact means is a spring contact suitable for establishing a detachable contact between the shielding and the control device in order to provide enhanced electromagnetic shielding and a connection to the ground reference potential of the operating circuit. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shielding of Biebl to have at least one contact means, it being possible to establish contact between the shielding and the control device by means of the at least one contact means, and the at least one contact means is a spring contact suitable for establishing a detachable contact between the shielding and the control device. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide enhanced electromagnetic shielding and a connection to the ground reference potential of the operating circuit (see Biebl top of page 3, top of page 6, and middle of page 6).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the prior art discussed in this action, the applicant is directed to form 892, and particularly the references Inaba (US 2006/0239022), which discloses at least a lighting device for a vehicle, comprising at least one light source, fastening means, a control device, and a shielding positioned to electromagnetically shield the control device or parts thereof and held on the fastening means, Kim (KR 20200143926), which discloses at least a lighting device for a vehicle, comprising at least one light source, fastening means, a control device, and a shielding positioned to electromagnetically shield the control device or parts thereof and held on the fastening means, and Ishii (JP 2012174539), which discloses at least a lighting device for a vehicle, comprising at least one light source, fastening means, a control device, and a shielding positioned to electromagnetically shield the control device or parts thereof and held on the fastening means.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN KRYUKOVA whose telephone number is (571)272-3761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a.m. - 4p.m.
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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 5712727044. 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.
/ERIN KRYUKOVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875