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 .
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(s) 1,2,7,8,12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Alfen et al (2017/03335526”Van Alfen” ) in view of Messiou et al (WO2016016604 “Messiou”) .
Regarding claim 1, Van Alfen discloses an illuminated roadway device(Fig. 16), comprising: an outer shell (110) fixable to a roadway; an electronics component(140) insertable into the outer shell (110, by means of 120 and 200), the electronics component comprising: a housing comprising a first housing(120), and a second housing securable to the first housing(200), a power device (142, battery) secured within the electronics component, a solar power generation component in coupled with the power device to recharge the power device(142, solar power module), and an impact plate(300) secured to the outer shell and covering at least a part of the electronics component (Para. 0074 and 0068).
Although Van Alfen discloses a light source (146), it does not disclose the limitations of an optic arrangement located at the housing comprising a light collimator in an internal space defined by the housing and in optical communication with a light-emitting surface at an external space of the housing; a light-emitting device aligned with the optic arrangement such that light emitted by the light-emitting device enters the light collimator. Messiou discloses of an optic arrangement located at the housing comprising a light collimator in an internal space defined by the housing and in optical communication with a light-emitting surface at an external space of the housing (100, 9,2,4, Figs 16,-18 and 20, Abstract); a light-emitting device (98) aligned with the optic arrangement such that light emitted by the light-emitting device enters the light collimator.
Accordingly, 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 device of Van Alfen with the optic arrangement of Messiou, as described above, for the purpose of providing Van Alfen with an improved lighting system as taught by Messiou (“In contrast to prior art the present invention provides a means of delineating a runway, pathway or roadway with compact optic and reduction in air spaces above ground level. The present invention provides a well-defined illuminating beam so improving safety and encouraging improved navigation. The novel optical arrangement provided also enables a compact geometry which is mechanically robust and has a smoothly tapered profile such that any impact by a vehicle running over the unit has minimal effect.” Summary of Invention, ⁋1, Messiou).
Regarding claim 2, the outer shell having a curved lower surface and a flat upper surface(Fig. 3, Van Alfen).
Regarding claim 7, the power device comprising a rechargeable battery or a supercapacitor.(Van Alfen, battery 142, Messiou, battery 70, also mentions capacitors)
Regarding claim 8, Van Alfen in view of Messiou discloses the limitations of claim 1. Messiou discloses the limitations of the light-emitting device comprising a plurality of light-emitting devices, at least one first light-emitting device of the plurality of light-emitting devices comprising a first color, and at least one second light-emitting device of the plurality of light-emitting devices comprising a second color, the optic arrangement configured to emit light of the first color in a first direction and light of the second color in a second direction.(Messiou, Description, Fig. 13, “Instead of using a dedicated infra-red LED 76, it would be possible to carry out the same comparison by using filters to detect the ratio of light intensity at two different wavelengths emitted by the white LED, for example blue light at 450nm and red light at 660nm, while noting that the closer the two wavelengths are, the smaller will be the difference in attenuation between them.”)
Regarding claim 12, Van Alfen in view of Messiou discloses the limitations of claim 1. Van Alfen discloses the electronics component further comprising a controller coupled with one or both of a sensor or a wireless communication device; the illuminated roadway device communicating with an external device external to the illuminated roadway device.( Van Alfen, Para. 0062-0063)
Regarding claim 13, Van Alfen in view of Messiou discloses the device of claim 12. Van Alfen does not disclose the limitations of the sensor comprising a magnetic sensor, wherein the controller is provisioned a magnetic device as the external device. Messiou discloses “in Figure 13 a second magnetic coil 86 for detecting the magnetic field of a passing motor vehicle is illustrated separately from the first magnetic coil 30 that derives power from the magnetic field of a passing motor vehicle” and “The second magnetic coil 86 could also be arranged to receive a pulsed signal (e.g. a radio frequency signal) from a specially adapted vehicle in order to program or change the mode of operation of the device. For example, the traffic authorities could switch on all the devices along a stretch of road to warn of a vehicle accident or other hazard ahead”. With regard to the limitation of the sensor comprising a magnetic sensor, wherein the controller is provisioned a magnetic device as the external device, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Van Alfen with Messiou in order to use the magnetic coil 86 to function as a sensor since it can be arranged to receive a pulsed signal (e.g. a radio frequency signal) from a specially adapted vehicle for the purpose of changing the mode of operation of the device ( Messiou, Description, Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 14, Van Alfen in view of Messiou obviates claim 13 above. Messiou discloses “a pulsed signal (e.g. a radio frequency signal) from a specially adapted vehicle in order to program or change the mode of operation of the device”. The recitation of “a specially adapted vehicle” is considered to satisfy the limitation of the external device being a road user, since a “road user” is considered to be definable as a “specially adapted vehicle” as disclosed by Messiou (Description, fig. 13).
Regarding claim 15, Van Alfen in view of Messiou discloses the limitations of claim 12. Van Alfen also discloses the electronics component configured to, using the wireless communication device, transmit one or more of status, health information, and/or battery life information to the external device.(Para. 0062; “There may also be additional modules disposed therein such as but not limited to communication modules (e.g. wireless adapters, transmitters, transceivers, network cards, and the like which may operate via transmission forms associated with radio, Wi-Fi, telephone, near-field communications, and the like), sensors (e.g. GPS devices, temperature sensors, stress/strain/force/weight sensors, vibration sensors, light sensors, audio sensors), timers/clocks, power level sensors, current/voltage sensors, motion sensors (e.g. accelerometers), and the like and combinations thereof which may be controlled by one or more processors having access to one or more busses, memory devices, actuators/buttons, power supplies, and the like and combinations thereof.). Although not specifically disclosing “battery life”, since Van Alfen is powered by batteries fed by a solar panel, and also discloses power sensors , Van Alfen is considered teach the limitation of “the electronics component configured to, using the wireless communication device, transmit one or more of status of battery life.
Regarding claim 16, Van Alfen on view of Messiou discloses the limitations of claim 12.Van Alfen discloses the electronics component configured to control modulation of the light-emitting device to indicate battery life of the illuminated roadway device. (Para. 0062, see rejection of claim 15 above)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6,9-11,17-20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art cited of record does not anticipate individually or teach in combination the limitations of claims 3-6,9-11,17-21.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lambert (2018/0347127), discloses an illuminated road marker with a curved lower surface (74, Fig. 3.).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANABEL TON whose telephone number is (571)272-2382. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00pm -6:00pm (EST).
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at (571)270-5046. 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.
/ANABEL TON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875