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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 06 March 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 9-12, and 19 have been amended. Claim 3 has been cancelled. No claims have been added. Claims 1-2 and 4-19 are still pending in this application, with claims 1 and 19 being independent. The drawing objections set forth in the previous final office action mailed 10 December 2025 are overcome by Applicant’s amendments. The claim objections set forth in the previous final office action mailed 10 December 2025 are overcome by Applicant’s amendments. The 112 rejections set forth in the previous final office action mailed 10 December 2025 are overcome in part by Applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation recites “...wherein the at least one further lighting unit has a second light source that is hidden from an observer who is in the room...,” which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if the second light source is the same second light source introduced in claim 1, or a third light source different from that of the first and second light sources in claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...wherein the at least one further lighting unit has the second light source and the second light source is hidden from an observer who is in the room...--. Clarification from the Applicant is requested and appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 1-2, 5-6, 9-12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jarboe et al. (US 2024/0314911 A1, herein referred to as: Jarboe).
Regarding claim 1, Jarboe discloses a device for the low-glare lighting of a room (Figs. 1-10), having: a translucent body (18), a first lighting unit (16) arranged on or in the translucent body (as shown in Figs. 1-10), which first lighting unit (16) is adapted to light a surface directly (a surface positioned below the first lighting unit, e.g., as shown in Fig. 5), a second lighting unit (14) arranged in the translucent body (as shown in Figs. 1-10), which second lighting unit (14) is adapted to light the room through the translucent body (as shown in Figs. 1-10); and a longitudinal axis (a longitudinal axis extending parallel to H1 through a center of the device) and a transverse axis (a transverse axis extending perpendicular to said longitudinal axis and through the device), wherein: the translucent body (18) further has a first opening arranged along the longitudinal axis and extending along the transverse axis (at a lower end of the device through which light from 16 transmits, as shown in Figs. 1-10), the first lighting unit arranged in the translucent body is adapted to emit first light only via the first opening and to light a surface (as shown in Figs. 1-10; additionally, as noted in Fig. 10 and the corresponding description, utilizing a reflector 20 formed of PLA1 can be made with sufficient thickness to prevent light transmission by increasing reflectance, as indicated by the trend of PLA1 shown in Fig. 10. Such a feature of no transmission through the reflector would be necessary for producing varying modes, as noted in paragraph [0053]), and the second lighting unit (14) arranged in the translucent body (18; as shown in Figs. 1-10) is adapted to emit second light (as shown in Figs. 1-10) that passes only through the translucent body and illuminates the room (e.g., as shown in Fig. 3), wherein the first lighting unit (16) has a first hidden light source (a light source on 16 hidden by 20 and 18) that is hidden from an observer who is in the room (there are various positions an observer can stand in a room having the light source by which the first light source is hidden from said observer).
Regarding claim 2, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) the first hidden light source (a light source on 16 hidden by 20 and 18) and wherein the device is devoid of a line of sight between an observer who is in the room and the first hidden light source (there are various positions an observer can stand in a room having the lighting device by which the device is devoid of a line of sight between an observer and the first hidden light source).
Regarding claim 5, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) wherein there is a line of sight between the observer and the first and/or second hidden light source (e.g., as shown in Fig. 6), wherein a first observation angle has a value between ±900, ±600, or ±400, with respect to the longitudinal axis (as shown in Fig. 6. Additionally, there are various first observation angles that can be defined which satisfy the above-cited limitation as the position of the observer and/or the lighting device relative to the observer can freely change as the observer moves in a room in which the device of Jarboe is installed).
Regarding claim 6, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) the device is devoid of a line of sight between an observer who is in the room and the first and/or second hidden light source (there are various positions an observer can stand in a room having the lighting device by which the device is devoid of a line of sight between an observer and the first hidden light source or the second light source, which is also hidden by 18).
Regarding claim 9, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) the first and at least one further opening (a further opening at a top portion of 18 thereof in which 14 is inserted, e.g., Fig. 3) are arranged along the longitudinal axis opposite one another (as shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) the first lighting unit (16, and/or 16, 20) and the translucent body (18) are arranged on the longitudinal axis (as shown in Fig. 3) and a light-emitting end of the first lighting unit (e.g., for a light-emitting end formed by 16, 20) terminates at, in particular flush with, the first opening of the translucent body (as shown in Fig. 3), and/or at least one further lighting unit (14) and the translucent body (18) are arranged on the longitudinal axis (as shown in Fig. 3) and a light-emitting end of the further lighting unit terminates at, in particular flush with, at least one further opening (at a top of 18 thereof, as shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) a light emission angle at the first and/or at least one further opening (e.g., an opening at a bottom of 18) has a value between ±900, ±600, or ±400, with respect to a perpendicular to the respective opening plane (as shown in Figs. 5-6).
Regarding claim 12, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) the first lighting unit (16) and a further lighting unit (14) can be screwed together (as the particulars of the screw are not defined in the claims, said elements can be screwed together via fasteners at a bottom of 18, and indirectly connected via 18) and/or the second lighting unit (14) is arranged on the first (16, as shown in Fig. 3, via 18) or the further lighting unit (14).
Regarding claim 19, Jarboe discloses (Figs. 1-10) a method for the low-glare illumination of a room, comprising the steps: providing a translucent body (18); providing a first lighting unit (16) arranged on or in the translucent body (as shown in Fig. 3); lighting a surface (a surface below 18) with the first lighting unit (e.g., as shown in Figs. 5-6); providing a second lighting unit (14) arranged in the translucent body (as shown in Fig. 3), which second lighting unit (14) is adapted to emit second light (as shown in Fig. 3); lighting the room with the second light through the translucent body (as shown in Fig. 3); wherein: the translucent body (18) further has a first opening arranged along the longitudinal axis and extending along the transverse axis (at a lower end of the device through which light from 16 transmits, as shown in Figs. 1-10), the first lighting unit arranged in the translucent body is adapted to emit first light only via the first opening and to light a surface (as shown in Figs. 1-10; additionally, as noted in Fig. 10 and the corresponding description, utilizing a reflector 20 formed of PLA1 can be made with sufficient thickness to prevent light transmission by increasing reflectance, as indicated by the trend of PLA1 shown in Fig. 10. Such a feature of no transmission through the reflector would be necessary for producing varying modes, as noted in paragraph [0053]), and the second lighting unit (14) arranged in the translucent body (18; as shown in Figs. 1-10) is adapted to emit second light (as shown in Figs. 1-10) that passes only through the translucent body and illuminates the room (e.g., as shown in Fig. 3), wherein the first lighting unit (16) has a first hidden light source (a light source on 16 hidden by 20 and 18) that is hidden from an observer who is in the room (there are various positions an observer can stand in a room having the light source by which the first light source is hidden from said observer).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jarboe, in view of Stagni (US 9,416,922 B1).
Regarding claim 4, as is best understood, Jarboe does not explicitly teach the translucent body has at least one further opening, in particular arranged/extending along the longitudinal axis and/or arranged/extending along the transverse axis, wherein there is arranged on or in the translucent body at least one further lighting unit which is adapted to emit third light and to light a further surface via the at least one further opening, wherein the at least one further lighting unit has a second light source that is hidden from an observer who is in the room.
Stagni teaches or suggests (Figs. 1-16) the translucent body (140) has at least one further opening (at a top portion thereof), in particular arranged/extending along the longitudinal axis and/or arranged/extending along the transverse axis (as shown in Fig. 1B), wherein there is arranged on or in the translucent body at least one further lighting unit (e.g., the LEDs arranged on the top surface of 142) which is adapted to emit third light and to light a further surface via the at least one further opening (as shown in Fig. 1B, i.e., a surface above 121), wherein the at least one further lighting unit has a second light source (e.g., another LED of 142) that is hidden from an observer who is in the room (as shown in Fig. 1B, i.e., 142 is surrounded by 140 and is thus, hidden from an observer in the room whose view is obstructed by 140).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Jarboe and incorporated the teachings of the translucent body has at least one further opening, in particular arranged/extending along the longitudinal axis and/or arranged/extending along the transverse axis, wherein there is arranged on or in the translucent body at least one further lighting unit which is adapted to emit third light and to light a further surface via the at least one further opening, wherein the at least one further lighting unit has a second light source that is hidden from an observer who is in the room, such as taught or suggested by Stagni, in order to improve the marketability and/or utility of the device (i.e., by providing a configuration by which the lighting device can provide additional illumination output to varying surfaces), and/or reduce the cost of manufacturing the device and/or reduce the complexity of assembling the device (e.g. by providing a configuration by which all of the lighting units can be placed at once, or on the same carrier structure).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jarboe, in view of Ho (US 2010/0039821 A1).
Regarding claims 7-8, Jarboe does not explicitly teach that a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or part of a/the area of the room is less than one, wherein the luminance ratio is determined in relation to an observer who is standing outside a first and/or second observation angle (as recited in claim 7) or wherein a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a room luminance is less than one (as recited in claim 8).
Ho teaches or suggests a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or part of a/the area of the room is less than one (paragraph [0043]), wherein the luminance ratio is determined in relation to an observer who is standing outside a first and/or second observation angle (one skilled in the art would recognize that measuring the relative luminance of the system 100 can be done outside of the cited observation angles and at various other positions in the room) or wherein a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a room luminance is less than one (paragraph [0043]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Jarboe and incorporated the teachings of a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or part of a/the area of the room is less than one, wherein the luminance ratio is determined in relation to an observer who is standing outside a first and/or second observation angle (as recited in claim 7) or wherein a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a room luminance is less than one (as recited in claim 8), such as taught or suggested by Ho, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to yield the predictable result of implementing a pleasant and stable illumination environment.
Claims 13, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jarboe, in view of Porter (US 5,806,973 A).
Regarding claim 13, Jarboe teaches or suggests (Figs. 1-10) a longitudinal axis and a transverse axis (10 comprises a longitudinal axis extending parallel to H1 through a center of 10, and a transverse axis extending perpendicularly thereto), a second lighting unit (14) arranged in the translucent body (18), which second lighting unit (14) is adapted to emit second light and to light the room through the translucent body (as shown in Fig. 3).
Jarboe does not explicitly teach that a pedestal unit in contact with a surface, which pedestal unit is adapted to generate first light, to conduct it out of the pedestal unit and to project it onto part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit.
Porter teaches or suggests (Figs. 1-2) a pedestal unit (12, 20, 26) in contact with a surface (at portion 32), which pedestal unit is adapted to generate first light (via 26), to conduct it out of the pedestal unit and to project it onto part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (as shown in Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Jarboe and incorporated the teachings of a pedestal unit in contact with a surface, which pedestal unit is adapted to generate first light, to conduct it out of the pedestal unit and to project it onto part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit, such as taught or suggested by Porter, in order to improve the marketability and/or utility of the device (i.e., by providing a configuration by which the lighting device can provide additional illumination output to varying surfaces and/or be utilized in additional lighting applications or decorations).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Jarboe does not explicitly teach that the pedestal unit has: a pedestal body in contact with the surface, in which pedestal body there is arranged, in particular centrally in a light-guiding unit and/or light conductor which has the pedestal body, a first lighting unit which is adapted to emit first light, and a light-guiding unit arranged at or on the pedestal body, which light-guiding unit is adapted to receive the first light emitted by the first lighting unit and to project it out of the light-guiding unit onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (as recited in claim 16); wherein the light-guiding unit is adapted to project the first light onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit at an angle between ±900, 600, or ±400, with respect to the longitudinal axis (as recited in claim 17).
Porter teaches or suggests (Figs. 1-2) a pedestal body (12, 20, 26, 46) in contact with the surface (at portion 32, during use), in which pedestal body there is arranged, in particular centrally in a light-guiding unit and/or light conductor which has the pedestal body, a first lighting unit (26) which is adapted to emit first light (as shown in Fig. 1), and a light-guiding unit (12) arranged at or on the pedestal body, which light-guiding unit is adapted to receive the first light emitted by the first lighting unit and to project it out of the light-guiding unit onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (as shown by the lines representing light rays in Fig. 1); wherein the light-guiding unit (12) is adapted to project the first light onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit at an angle between ±900, 600, or ±400, with respect to the longitudinal axis (as shown by at least a portion of the light rays shown in Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Jarboe and incorporated the teachings of a pedestal body in contact with the surface, in which pedestal body there is arranged, in particular centrally in a light-guiding unit and/or light conductor which has the pedestal body, a first lighting unit which is adapted to emit first light, and a light-guiding unit arranged at or on the pedestal body, which light-guiding unit is adapted to receive the first light emitted by the first lighting unit and to project it out of the light-guiding unit onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (as recited in claim 16); wherein the light-guiding unit is adapted to project the first light onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit at an angle between ±900, 600, or ±400, with respect to the longitudinal axis (as recited in claim 17), in order to improve the marketability and/or utility of the device (i.e., by providing a configuration by which the lighting device can provide additional illumination output to varying surfaces and/or be utilized in additional lighting applications or decorations).
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jarboe, in view of Porter, as applied to claim 13 above, and in further view of Ho.
Regarding claims 14 and 15, as are best understood, Jarboe does not explicitly teach that a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or a mean room luminance of part of a/the area of the room is less than one (as recited in claim 14), or wherein a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or a mean room luminance of part of a/the area of the room is less than or equal to one, wherein the luminance ratio is determined in relation to an observer who is standing outside the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (as recited in claim 15).
Ho teaches or suggests a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or a mean room luminance of part of a/the area of the room is less than one (paragraph [0043]), or wherein a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or a mean room luminance of part of a/the area of the room is less than or equal to one (paragraph [0043]), wherein the luminance ratio is determined in relation to an observer who is standing outside the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (one skilled in the art would recognize that measuring the relative luminance of the system 100 can be done outside of the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Jarboe and incorporated the teachings of a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or a mean room luminance of part of a/the area of the room is less than one (as recited in claim 14), or wherein a luminance ratio of a device luminance to a mean room luminance of an area or a mean room luminance of part of a/the area of the room is less than or equal to one, wherein the luminance ratio is determined in relation to an observer who is standing outside the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (as recited in claim 15), such as taught or suggested by Ho, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to yield the predictable result of implementing a pleasant and stable illumination environment.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jarboe, in view of Porter, as applied to claim 17 above, and in further view of Stormberg et al. (US 2017/0114968 A1, herein referred to as: Stormberg).
Regarding claim 18, Jarboe does not explicitly teach that the light-guiding unit has: a light conductor, which is adapted to receive the first light and to conduct it to a deflection mirror, wherein the curved deflection mirror and the light conductor are adapted to project the first light onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit at an angle between ±900, 600, or ± 400 with respect to the longitudinal axis.
Stormberg teaches or suggests the light-guiding unit has: a light conductor (130), which is adapted to receive the first light (as shown in Fig. 4) and to conduct it to a deflection mirror (480), wherein the curved deflection mirror (480) and the light conductor (130) are adapted to project the first light onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit (via rotation about 462) at an angle between ±900, 600, or ± 400 with respect to the longitudinal axis (as shown in Fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Jarboe and incorporated the teachings of the light-guiding unit has: a light conductor, which is adapted to receive the first light and to conduct it to a deflection mirror, wherein the curved deflection mirror and the light conductor are adapted to project the first light onto the part of the surface surrounding the pedestal unit at an angle between ±900, 600, or ± 400 with respect to the longitudinal axis, such as taught or suggested by Stormberg, in order to improve the marketability and/or utility of the device (i.e., by providing a configuration by which the lighting device can provide additional illumination output to varying surfaces and/or be utilized in additional lighting applications or decorations).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the combined teachings of Jarboe and Stagni failed to disclose, or suggest in combination, that “...the translucent body has at least one further opening, in particular arranged/extending along the longitudinal axis and/or arranged/extending along the transverse axis, wherein there is arranged on or in the translucent body at least one further lighting unit which is adapted to emit third light and to light a further surface via the at least one further opening, wherein the at least one further lighting unit has the second light source and the second light source is hidden from an observer who is in the room...,” since: “...the LED 142 does not fall under the claimed subject matter, as the LED 142 of Stagni clearly illuminates through the lamp shade and both openings of the shade. In contrast, claim 1 in combination with claim 4 defines light units that are configured to illuminate only through a specific entity. Specifically, claim 1 recites "a second lighting unit arranged in the translucent body, which second lighting unit is adapted to illuminate the room through the translucent body wherein the first lighting unit arranged in the translucent body is adapted to emit first light only via the first opening and to light a surface and the second lighting unit arranged in the translucent body is adapted to emit second light that passes only through the translucent body and illuminates the room, and claim 4 recites one further lighting unit which is adapted to emit third light and to light a further surface via the at least one further opening...,” pages 6-8 of the above-cited remarks, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In the instant case, the lighting device of 142 comprises several lighting units thereon (being formed by LEDs or groups thereof), which are orientated in different directions to emit light to different specified locations. Thus, incorporating a lighting arrangement such as that depicted in the Stagni reference to the device of Jarboe would be reasonably ascertainable by one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the teachings of Stagni, and would be reasonably obvious for the benefits noted above. Therefore, the combined teachings of Jarboe and Stagni reasonably teach or suggest the above-cited claim limitations.
In response to Applicant’s argument of claim 4 in that it pertains to a teaching away of the Stagni reference, pages 6-8 of the above-cited remarks, it is noted that the Applicant is using “teaching away” in a much broader sense that it is legally accepted. For a reference to be considered to teach away from a proposed modification such reference must criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the proposed combination. In re Fulton, 73 USPQ2d 1141 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Applicant is further advised that disclosed examples and/or preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments, even if such nonpreferred embodiments are described as somewhat inferior. See In re Susi, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971), and In re Gurley, 31 USPQ2d 1130 (Fed. Cir. 1994). In the instant case, the device of Jarboe also finds use as a table or floor lamp (e.g., see Fig. 9). Thus, the device of Jarboe is not strictly limited to the applications or embodiments cited by Applicant in the above-cited remarks. Therefore, the combined teachings of Jarboe and Stagni are reasonably combinable prior art structures, and otherwise do not teach away from the proposed modification outlined above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: please see WO 2017129506 A1 to Christiansen et al. and AT 413438 B, both of which also disclose various features of claims 1-2 and 4-19, particularly the features of claims 1 and 19. In addition, the Examiner notes that the instant claims do not define any particular structure for the translucent body, and thus, the device of Christiansen forms a translucent body having by having translucent portions thereon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Colin J Cattanach whose telephone number is (571)270-5203. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
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 (571) 272-7044. 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.
/COLIN J CATTANACH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875