DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/23/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14, 16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sassoon (US 2021/0372587 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Sassoon discloses a lighting device adapted for fastening to a vehicle, comprising:
a housing (202);
an LED lighting system contained within the housing defining a lighting surface for generating light, wherein the lighting surface has an outer edge and includes a first section (100) defined in part by a first portion of the outer edge and a second section (200) adjacent to the first section defined in part by a
PNG
media_image1.png
744
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
second portion of the outer edge, the LED lighting system comprising:
a first LED array (red LEDs 101-turn signal) adapted to emit light from the first section; and
a second LED array (white LEDs 201—back up light, work light) adapted to emit light from the second section at a lower luminosity level and an upper luminosity level, wherein the upper luminosity level is greater than the lower luminosity level; and
an input interface adapted to receive inputs to selectivity cause:
an emission of light from the first LED array to signal a first state of the vehicle (turning);
an emission of light at the lower luminosity level from the second LED array to signal a second state of the vehicle (backup light); and
an emission of light at the upper luminosity level from the second LED array (see [0006]). (See annotated Figure 6; see [0061] onward)
In regard to claim 2 and 3, Sassoon discloses a heat sink (11) adapted to dissipate heat generated by at least the second LED array, and as recited in claim 3, that the heat sink is positioned on a back surface of the housing. (Figure 4)
In regard to claim 4, Sassoon discloses the first state of the vehicle is any one of an operating state, a moving state, a braking state, a turning state, and a reversing state (turn/stop/tail lamp); and
the second state of the vehicle is any one of an operating state, a moving state, a braking state, a turning state, and a reversing state that is different from the first state (back-up lamp); and
the upper luminosity level of the second LED array is to provide a work lamp function (work light). (See [0006])
In regard to claim 5, Sassoon discloses the first LED array is adapted to emit light at a lower luminosity level and an upper luminosity level, wherein the upper luminosity level is greater than the lower luminosity level; and
the input interface is adapted to receive inputs to selectively cause:
an emission of light at the lower luminosity level (off, not turning breaking) from the first LED array to signal the first state of the vehicle; and
an emission of light at the upper luminosity level (on, turning or breaking) from the first LED array to signal a third state of the vehicle.
In regard to claim 6, Sassoon discloses the first state of the vehicle is an operating state or a moving state (not turning, not breaking); and the third state of the vehicle is either a braking state or a turning state (turning or breaking).
In regard to claim 7, Sassoon discloses the third state of the vehicle is a turning state; and light is emitted at the upper luminosity level from the first LED array intermittently. (This is how a turn signal works…)
In regard to claim 8 and 9, Sassoon discloses the light emitted from the first section is a first colour and the light emitted from the second section is a second colour different from the first colour, and as recited in claim 9, that the first colour is red and the second colour is white.
In regard to claim 10 and 11, Sassoon discloses a controller (see [0082]) that is configured to receive the inputs to selectively cause:
an emission of light from the first LED array to signal the first state of the vehicle;
an emission of light at the lower luminosity level from the second LED array to signal the second state of the vehicle; and
an emission of light at the upper luminosity level from the second LED array;
and as recited in claim 11, a controller that is configured to receive the inputs to selectively cause:
an emission of light at the lower luminosity level from the first LED array to signal the first state of the vehicle;
an emission of light at the upper luminosity level from the first LED array to signal the third state of the vehicle;
an emission of light at the lower luminosity level from the second LED array to signal the second state of the vehicle; and
an emission of light at the upper luminosity level from the second LED array.
.
In regard to claim 12 and 13, Sassoon discloses (see [0082]) the controller comprises an electrical circuit and a microprocessor.
PNG
media_image1.png
744
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 14, Sassoon discloses the second section of the LED lighting system is defined between the second portion of the outer edge of the lighting surface and a boundary line that runs from a first end of the second portion of the outer edge to a second end of the second portion of the outer edge, the boundary line separating the first section of the LED lighting system from the second section of the LED lighting system. (This geometry is not well-defined, and the claim remains broad. “A first end” and “a second end” is very broad. See annotated Figure 6)
In regard to claim 16, Sassoon discloses the input interface receives power from the vehicle for powering the LED lighting system. (See [0004])
In regard to claim 18, Sassoon discloses the vehicle is a truck and the lighting device is adapted to be fastened to a rear of the truck. (See [0002])
In regard to claim 20, Sassoon discloses a vehicle comprising the lighting device according to claim 1, wherein the lighting device is fastened to a rear of the vehicle. (See [0002])
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(s) 15, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sassoon (US 2021/0372587 A1).
In regard to claim 15, Sassoon fails to disclose the upper luminosity level of the second LED array is equal to or greater than 800 lumens.
However, this is disclosed as a work lamp, which should be as bright as possible. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to optimize the brightness of the work lamp in order for it to produce useful light for working while at night.
In regard to claim 17, Sassoon fails to disclose a battery for supplying power to the LED lighting system. However, battery backups and remote powering light sources is notoriously old and well-known, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a battery to lighting device of Sassoon in order to power the light remotely.
In regard to claim 19, Sassoon fails to disclose a trailer and the lighting device is adapted to be fastened to a rear of the trailer. However, what can be attached to the rear of a truck can be attached to the rear of a trailer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to attach the lamp to a trailer in order to provide for a work lamp on a work use vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has filed broad claim amendments which a clearly taught by the rejection of the Final Rejection. The lighting surface clearly has an outer edge of the transparent cover that has a first portion defining the first section and a second portion defining the second section. Further, in regard to claim 14, where the geometry is poorly defined, there is clearly a boundary line that runs from a first end of the second portion to a second end of the second portion—the second section is between the second portion and the boundary line. These broad claims in no way advanced prosecution.
In the spirit of compact prosecution, where the same rejection of record from a final is used in an RCE, a first action Final Rejection is mandated.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E DUNAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1222. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am - 6:00 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, James (Jong-Suk) 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E DUNAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights