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 .
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statements filed on 2/12/2025 and 2/12/2026 have been considered.
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/969,151 filed on 12/4/2024 is presented for examination by the Examiner.
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a non-statutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of co-pending U.S. Patent Application 19/346,595 of Okimutsu (hereinafter “Okimutsu”).
An explanation along with the listing of claims 1 of the present application and claim 1 of Okimutsu is given below.
Instant claims: 18/969,151
Patent App. No. 19/346,595
1. A light guide which guides light input from a light entrance surface to a light exit surface, which is different from the light entrance surface, so that the light is output from the light exit surface, comprising:
a light entrance section having the light entrance surface provided so that the light is
input from a first direction;
a light guiding section which is arranged closer to the light exit surface than the light
entrance section and which guides the light in a second direction intersecting the first direction so that the light is output from the light exit surface; and
a continuous section and a non-continuous section each arranged at a boundary between
the light entrance section and the light guiding section, the continuous section being provided so that the light entrance section and the light guiding section are continuously connected and the non-continuous section being provided so that the light entrance section and the light guiding section are spaced apart from one another.
1. A light guide which guides light input from a light entrance surface to a light exit surface which is different from the light entrance surface and outputs the light, the light guide comprising:
a light entrance section which has the light entrance surface provided such that the light
is input from a first direction;
a light guiding section which is arranged on a side of the light exit surface with respect to
the light entrance section and guides the light in a second direction intersecting the first direction; and
a continuous section which is provided such that the light entrance section and the light
guiding section are continuous, and a non-continuous section which is provided such that the light entrance section and the light guiding section are spaced apart from one another, the continuous section and the non-continuous section each being arranged at a boundary between the light entrance section and the light guiding section, wherein
the light entrance section has a reflective surface which is provided so as to reflect a part of the light input from the light entrance surface, and a light transmitting section which transmits another part of the light input from the light entrance surface and reflected light reflected by the reflective surface,
the light guiding section is provided to further guide the reflected light in the second
direction,
the continuous section is provided such that the light transmitting section of the light
entrance section and the light guiding section are continuous, and
the non-continuous section is provided such that the reflective surface of the light
entrance section and the light guiding section are spaced apart from one another.
Claim 1 of Okimutsu discloses all the limitations of claim 1 of the present application (see underlining above), except for disclosing the light guiding section being arranged closer to the light exit surface than the light entrance section.
Morgan (US 2008/0271776, hereinafter, “Morgan”) discloses a light guide 100 which guides light input 106 from a light entrance surface 108 to a light exit surface 130, which is different from the light entrance surface, so that the light is output from the light exit surface (Fig. 1, [0104]), comprising:
a light entrance section 102 having the light entrance surface 108 provided so that the light is input from a first direction (Fig. 1, [0104]);
a light guiding section 104 which is arranged closer to the light exit surface 130 than the light entrance section 108 and which guides the light in a second direction (Fig. 1, [0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Okimutsu so that the light guiding section being arranged closer to the light exit surface than the light entrance section, as taught by Morgan, for maximizing light being output at the output at the light exit surface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1-13, 15-17, 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morgan.
Regarding claim 1, Morgan discloses a light guide 100 which guides light input 106 from a light entrance surface 108 to a light exit surface 130, which is different from the light entrance surface, so that the light is output from the light exit surface (Fig. 1, [0104]), comprising:
a light entrance section 102 having the light entrance surface 108 provided so that the light is input from a first direction (Fig. 1, [0104]);
a light guiding section 104 which is arranged closer to the light exit surface 130 than the light entrance section 108 and which guides the light in a second direction (downstream direction) intersecting the first direction so that the light is output from the light exit surface (Fig. 1, 4, [0104]); and
a continuous section 116 and a non-continuous section 124, 114 each arranged at a boundary between the light entrance section 102 and the light guiding section 104, the continuous section being provided so that the light entrance section and the light guiding section are continuously connected and the non-continuous section being provided so that the light entrance section and the light guiding section are spaced apart from one another (Fig. 1, [0104], [0105]).
Regarding claim 2, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
a plurality of continuous sections, each being the continuous section 116, and a plurality of non-continuous sections, each being the non-continuous section 124, 114, are each provided at the boundary between the light entrance section 102 and the light guiding section 104, and the plurality of continuous sections and the plurality of non-continuous sections are alternately arranged along the second direction (Fig. 1, [0104]).
Regarding claim 3, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 2, wherein
the continuous section and the non-continuous section are arranged so that a length of the continuous section 116 is shorter than a length of the non-continuous section 124, 114 in the second direction (Fig. 1, [0104]).
Regarding claim 4, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
the light entrance section has a reflective surface 112 provided to reflect the light input 106 from the light entrance surface 108 toward the continuous section 116 (Fig.1, [0104]) .
Regarding claim 5, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 4, wherein
the reflective surface 112 is formed to reflect the light input 106 from a direction orthogonal to the light entrance surface 108 toward the continuous section 116 (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 5, wherein
the reflective surface 112 is formed to be curved or bent on a cross-section including the first direction and the second direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 5, further having another reflective surface which is arranged to be opposed to the reflective surface and which reflects the light input from the light entrance surface toward the continuous section (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
the light entrance section 102 extends in the second direction (downstream direction) and the light entrance surface is formed in a planar shape having a width in a third direction intersecting each of the first direction and the second direction (Fig. 1, 4).
Regarding claim 9, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 8, the light guiding section 104 is formed to extend in the second direction (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 9, wherein
an end (bottom of 104), on a side opposite to the light entrance section 102, of the light guiding section 104 in the first direction is formed in a planar shape (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 8, wherein
the continuous section is formed to extend in the third direction (towards the page) (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 11, wherein
the continuous section is arranged so that the third direction is substantially parallel to a plane including a trajectory of the sun (Fig. 1, [0104], the third direction extension of the continuous section 116 is parallel to a plane including a trajectory of the sun emitting sun light rays 106).
Regarding claim 13, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 11, wherein
the light entrance section 102 and the light guiding section 104 are each formed as a body separate from one another and are formed by being joined to one another via the continuous section 116 (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
the light entrance section 102 and the light guiding section 104 are formed of a same material (Fig. 1, [0104]).
Regarding claim 16, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
the non-continuous section 124, 114 includes a first non-continuous section 124 in which a separation distance between the light entrance section and the light guiding section is constant along the second direction and a second non-continuous section 114 in which a separation distance between the light entrance section and the light guiding section is inconstant along the second direction (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 16, wherein
the light entrance section 102 has a reflective surface 110 provided to reflect the light input from the light entrance surface toward the continuous section 116, and
an opposite surface (right side of 110), facing toward a side with the light guiding section 104, of the reflective surface 110 is provided to constitute an end, on a side with the light entrance section 102, of the second non-continuous section 114 (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 27, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
the light entrance section 102 has a reflective surface 112 provided to reflect the light input from the light entrance surface and the reflective surface is formed in a linear shape on a cross-section including the first direction and the second direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 28, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1, wherein
the non-continuous section 124, 114 is provided so that an end 124, on a side with the light guiding section, of the non-continuous section extends to be inclined with respect to the second direction (Fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2012/0033302, hereinafter, “Suzuki”).
Regarding claim 14, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 13.
Morgan does not disclose the light entrance section and the light guiding section are joined by welding.
Suzuki discloses a sunlight collector optical element 1 (Fig. 1, [0060]). In one embodiment, during the fabrication of the optical element 1, a first light transmissive layer 3 is bonded with a separate second light transmissive layer 5 by welding (Fig. 7C, [0096]).
Both Morgan and Suzuki disclose sunlight collector optical systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Morgan so that the two optical layers 102 and 104 are joined by welding, as taught by Suzuki, for prevention of loss of light transmitted through the light guide ([0146] in Suzuki).
Claims 18-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan in view of Morgan et al. (US 2014/0261683, hereinafter, “Morgan1”).
Regarding claim 18, Morgan discloses the light guide according to claim 1.
Morgan does not disclose further comprising a light collecting section which is arranged on a side opposite to the light entrance section with respect to the light guiding section in the first direction and which is provided so that the light passing through the light guiding section is input to the light collecting section.
Morgan1 discloses a solar collector redirecting solar light into a waveguide (Abstract). In one embodiment, light 133 incident on light entrance section 1008 is directed to a light guiding section 1004. A light collecting section 1054 arranged on a side opposite to the light entrance section 1008 with respect to the light guiding section 1004 collects light passing through the light guiding section 1004 (Fig. 10, [0048]).
Both Morgan and Morgan1 disclose sunlight collector optical systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Morgan so that a light collecting layer arranged below the light guiding section 104 of Morgan receives light therefrom and redirects to the light guiding section, as taught by Morgan1, for prevention of loss of light transmitted through the light guiding section.
Regarding claim 19, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 18, further comprising another continuous section 1020 and another non-continuous section 1022 each arranged at another boundary between the light guiding section 1004 and the light collecting section 1054, the another continuous section 1020 being provided so that the light guiding section 10004 and the light collecting section 1054 continuously connected and the another non-continuous section 1022 being provided so that the light guiding section 1004 and the light collecting section 1054 are spaced apart from one another (Fig. 10, [0049], [0051] in Morgan1, under the Reasonable Broadest Interpretation principle, sections 1004 and 1054 are spaced apart due to the bump 1060).
Regarding claim 20, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 19, wherein
the light collecting section 1054 includes a light returning section 1006 which returns passing-through light which passed through the light guiding section 1004 to the light guiding section 1004 (Fig. 10, [0050] in Morgan1).
Regarding claim 21, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 20, wherein
the light returning section 1006 has further another reflective surface which reflects the passing-through light toward the another continuous section 1020 (Fig. 10 in Morgan1).
Regarding claim 22, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 21, wherein
the light returning section 1006 has a refractive surface 1022 which refracts the passing-through light reflected by the further another reflective surface toward the another continuous section 1022 (Fig. 10 in Morgan1).
Regarding claim 23, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 21, wherein
the light entrance section has a reflective surface 1050 provided to reflect the light input from the light entrance surface toward the continuous section 1048, and
the further another reflective surface of the light returning section is arranged to be offset from the reflective surface of the light entrance section in the second direction (Fig. 10 in Morgan1).
Regarding claim 24, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 21, wherein
the light entrance section has a reflective surface 1050 provided to reflect the light input from the light entrance surface toward the continuous section 1048,
the another continuous section and the another non-continuous section are arranged so that a length of the another continuous section is shorter than a length of the another non-continuous section in the second direction (see bottom of 1006), and
a center of the another continuous section is arranged to be offset from the further another reflective surface of the light returning section and the reflective surface of the light entrance (Fig. 10 in Morgan1).
Regarding claim 25, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 19, wherein
at least a part of the continuous section 1048 and at least a part of the another non-continuous section 1022 are provided to be overlapped with one another when viewed in the first direction (Fig. 10 in Morgan1).
Regarding claim 26, Morgan/Morgan1 discloses the light guide according to claim 19, wherein
the another non-continuous section is provided so that a separation distance between the light guiding section and the light collecting section is constant along the second direction (see gap 1058 between part of 1022 and 114 in Fig. 10 of Morgan1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEONIDAS BOUTSIKARIS whose telephone number is (703)756-4529. The Examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fr. 9.00-5.00.
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, Stephone Allen, can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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.
/L.B./
Patent Examiner, AU 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights