DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Miscellaneous
The Applicant has cancelled claims 2-30; therefore, only claim 1 remains for this Office Action.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,369,438. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they contain substantially similar subject matter (see chart below).
Instant Application
US Patent No. 12,369,438
1. A light-emitting system comprising: at least one first light-emitting source configured to emit a first radiation, said first radiation being blue light having a first wavelength; at least one second light-emitting source configured to emit a second radiation, said second radiation being violet light having a second wavelength shorter than said first wavelength; one or more wavelength-converting materials disposed to absorb at least a portion of said first or second radiations, and configured to emit a converted radiation having one or more wavelengths longer than said first or second wavelengths such that said system emits emitted light comprising a blend of two or more of said first, second and converted radiations; and at least one driving circuit for selectively powering said at least one first and second light-emitting sources to adjust said blend of said emitted light.
1. An optical device(light-emitting system) comprising: a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) light sources comprising at least a first plurality n of first LED light sources and a second plurality m of second LED light sources, said first LED light sources emitting radiation having a peak first wavelength in a range of about 420 nm to about 490 nm (which equates to blue light), said second LED light sources emitting radiation having a peak second wavelength shorter than said first wavelength (see claims 2-3 below, violet light); at least one wavelength-converting material disposed in a radiation path of at least one of said plurality of LED light sources, and configured to convert radiation from said at least one of said plurality of LED light sources to radiation having a peak third wavelength in a range of about 500 nm to about 650 nm (which is greater than the first and second wavelengths); wherein n:m ratio is greater than 1; and wherein the optical device outputs a resulting radiation from said plurality of LED light sources and said at least one wavelength-converting material, wherein said radiation is warm white light.
2. The optical device of claim 1, wherein said second peak wavelength is between 380 nm and 470 nm.
3. The optical device of claim 1, wherein said second LED light source is a violet LED light source.
4. The optical device of claim 1, further comprising: driving circuitry for independently driving at least said first and second LED light sources.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claim 1 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Omoto et al. (US 2004/0207313).
In regards to claim 1, Omoto discloses of a light-emitting system comprising: at least one first light-emitting source configured to emit a first radiation, said first radiation being blue light having a first wavelength (for example see 11, Figs 2A-B, 4A-B and Paragraphs 0032-0033, 0035-0036); at least one second light-emitting source configured to emit a second radiation, said second radiation being violet light having a second wavelength shorter than said first wavelength (for example see 12, Figs 2A-B, 4A-B and Paragraphs 0032-0033, 0035-0036); one or more wavelength-converting materials (for example 16-18, see Figs 2A-B, 4A-B and Paragraphs 0032-0033, 0035-0036) disposed to absorb at least a portion of said first or second radiations, and configured to emit a converted radiation having one or more wavelengths longer than said first or second wavelengths such that said system emits emitted light comprising a blend of two or more of said first, second and converted radiations (see Figs 2A-B, 4A-B and Paragraphs 0031, 0035; emit white light which has a greater wavelength than blue and violet); and at least one driving circuit for selectively powering said at least one first and second light-emitting sources to adjust said blend of said emitted light (for example see Paragraphs 0058-0066, drive currents for independently controlling the light-emitting sources supplied by a driver which is not shown).
Claim 1 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Oshio (US 2011/0102706).
In regards to claim 1, Oshio discloses of a light-emitting system comprising: at least one first light-emitting source configured to emit a first radiation, said first radiation being blue light having a first wavelength (for example see 2a, Figs 3-5 and Paragraphs 0058, 0062, 0078, 0081, 0116); at least one second light-emitting source configured to emit a second radiation, said second radiation being violet light having a second wavelength shorter than said first wavelength (for example 2b, see Figs 3-5 and Paragraphs 0024, 0030, 0058, 0062, 0070, 0072, 0078, 0081, 0103, 0116); one or more wavelength-converting materials (for example 6-9, see Figs 3-5 and Paragraphs 0056, 0059-0060, 0062, 0064-0065, 0069-0070, 0072-0073, 0075, 0081, 0083-0084, 0087, 0095-0096, 0100-0114) disposed to absorb at least a portion of said first or second radiations, and configured to emit a converted radiation having one or more wavelengths longer than said first or second wavelengths such that said system emits emitted light comprising a blend of two or more of said first, second and converted radiations (for example see Figs 3-7 and Paragraphs 0052, 00574, 0097, 0118-0120; emits a white light with a greater wavelength than that of the blue and violet wavelengths); and at least one driving circuit for selectively powering said at least one first and second light-emitting sources to adjust said blend of said emitted light (see Paragraphs 0033, 0115, 0122, LEDs independently controlled by (not shown) driver circuit side).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason M Crawford whose telephone number is (571)272-6004. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00am-3:00pm.
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, Alexander Taningco can be reached at 571-272-8048. 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.
/JASON M CRAWFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Prosecution Insights