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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt of the Amendment, filed on June 20, 2025, is acknowledged.
Cancellation of claims 1-20 has been entered.
Claims 21-40 are pending in the instant application.
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 26 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.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "said frame" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,247,731 B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as set forth below.
Instant application
U.S. Patent No. 12,247,731
Claim 21 states,
An artificial sunlight system for wall installation comprising: (1) one or more modules configured for installation on a wall, each module comprising at least the following, (2) at least one panel, (3) said panel having first and second ends and an emission surface for emitting panel light, and (4) said panel being configured to emit said panel light away from said wall when said module is installed on said wall; and (5) at least one ceiling light emitter, (6) said ceiling light emitter being configured to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling when said module is installed on said wall.
Claims 1, 2, 10-12 and 18, each state,
An artificial sunlight system for wall installation comprising: (1) one or more modules, each module comprising at least the following, a frame configured to be installed on a wall; (2) at least one panel supported by said frame, (3) said panel having first and second ends and an emission surface for emitting panel light, and (4) said panel being configured to emit said panel light away from said wall when said frame is installed on said wall; and (5) at least one ceiling light emitter supported by said frame, (6) said ceiling light emitter being configured to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling when said frame is installed on said wall…
Claim 22 states,
(7) wherein said panel light and said ceiling light are different in at least spectrum or intensity.
Claim 3 states,
(7) wherein said panel light and said ceiling light are different in at least spectrum or intensity.
Claim 23 states,
(8) wherein said ceiling light is uniform.
Claim 4 states,
(8) wherein said ceiling light is uniform.
Claim 24 states,
(9) wherein said ceiling light emitter is a projector for displaying images.
Claim 1 states,
(9) wherein said ceiling light emitter is a projector for displaying images.
Claim 25 states,
(10) wherein said panel light is configured in one or more of the following ways: to be uniform; to have a gradient in color, to have a gradient of intensity; to be patterned; or to dynamically display images.
Claim 5 states,
(10) wherein said panel light is configured in one or more of the following ways: to be uniform; to have a gradient in color, to have a gradient of intensity; to be patterned; or to dynamically display images.
Claim 26 states,
(11) wherein said first end is the top and said second end is at the bottom when said frame is installed in said wall.
Claim 10 states,
(11) wherein said first end is the top and said second end is at the bottom when said frame is installed in said wall; wherein panel light source and said ceiling light emitter operate in at least a high circadian stimulation (CS) mode and a low CS mode; wherein, in said low CS mode, the ceiling light is off, and said panel light is a dim, warm, low CS light emitted only at the second end.
Claim 27 states,
(12) wherein panel light source and said ceiling light emitter operate in at least a high circadian stimulation (CS) mode and a low CS mode.
Claim 10 states,
(12) wherein panel light source and said ceiling light emitter operate in at least a high circadian stimulation (CS) mode and a low CS mode.
Claim 28 states,
(13) wherein, in said high CS mode, said ceiling light is a high CS blue and said panel light has a color gradient from pale blue to white from said first end to said second end.
Claim 10 states,
(13) wherein, in said high CS mode, said ceiling light is a high CS blue and said panel light has a color gradient from pale blue to white from said first end to said second end.
Claim 29 states,
(14) wherein, in said low CS mode, the ceiling light is off, and said panel light is a dim, warm, low CS light emitted only at the second end.
Claim 11 states,
(14) wherein, in said low CS mode, the ceiling light is off, and said panel light is a dim, warm, low CS light emitted only at the second end.
Claim 30 states,
(15) wherein, said panel light emits a color gradient between said first and second ends wherein the color at the first end is configured to vary from pale blue to violet/blue, and the color at said second end is configured to vary from cool white to orange/amber.
Claim 12 states,
(15) said panel light emits a color gradient between said first and second ends wherein the color at the first end is configured to vary from pale blue to violet/blue, and the color at said second end is configured to vary from cool white to orange/amber.
Claim 31 states,
(16) wherein, said ceiling light transitions among violet/blue, pale blue, and off.
Claim 13 states,
(16) wherein, said ceiling light transitions among violet/blue, pale blue, and off.
Claim 32 states,
(17) wherein, said panel light emits a color gradient between said first and second ends, wherein during the course of a day, the panel light at said first end transitions from violet/blue to pale blue to violet/blue and finally to off, and said panel light at said second end transitions from orange/amber to cool white to orange/amber and finally to off.
Claim 14 states,
(17) wherein, said panel light emits a color gradient between said first and second ends, wherein during the course of a day, the panel light at said first end transitions from violet/blue to pale blue to violet/blue and finally to off, and said panel light at said second end transitions from orange/amber to cool white to orange/amber and finally to off.
Claim 33 states,
(18) wherein, wherein during the course of a day, said ceiling light transitions from violet/blue to pale blue to violet/blue and finally to off.
Claim 15 states,
(18) wherein, wherein during the course of a day, said ceiling light transitions from violet/blue to pale blue to violet/blue and finally to off.
Claim 34 states,
(19) wherein said at least one panel comprises multiple panels arranged as windowpanes, each of said multiple panels being coordinated so light color and/or color gradient is continuous across said multiple panels.
Claim 18 states,
(19) wherein said at least one panel comprises multiple panels arranged as windowpanes, each of said multiple panels being coordinated so light color and/or color gradient is continuous across said multiple panels.
Claim 35 states,
(20) wherein one or more modules comprises multiple modules, wherein said multiple modules are synchronized to emulate multiple windows in a room.
Claim 19 states,
(20) wherein one or more modules comprises multiple modules, wherein said multiple modules are synchronized to emulate multiple windows in a room.
Claim 36 states,
(21) wherein each of said multiple modules is configurable to specify the orientation of the module, thereby facilitating independent control of each module according to its orientation, wherein said modules having different orientation vary in color and/or intensity.
Claim 19 states,
(21) wherein each of said multiple modules is configurable to specify the orientation of the module, thereby facilitating independent control of each module according to its orientation, wherein said modules having different orientation vary in color and/or intensity.
Claim 37 states,
(22) wherein said panel comprises a first end light source and a second end light source, and a lightguide optically coupled to said first and second end light sources, and configured for emitting light from said emission surface.
Claim 16 states,
(22) wherein said panel comprises a first end light source and a second end light source, and a lightguide optically coupled to said first and second end light sources, and configured for emitting light from said emission surface.
Claim 38 states,
(23) wherein said first and second end light sources are bar lights.
Claim 17 states,
(23) wherein said first and second end light sources are bar lights.
Claim 39 states,
(24) wherein said panel light and said ceiling light vary between different spectrum and/or intensity modes, and wherein the transition between said modes is controlled by a dimmer or a timer synced to an astronomical clock.
Claim 8 states,
(24) wherein said panel light and said ceiling light vary between different spectrum and/or intensity modes, and wherein the transition between said modes is controlled by a dimmer or a timer synced to an astronomical clock.
Claim 40 states,
(25) wherein said panel light and said ceiling light vary between different spectrum and/or intensity modes, and wherein the transition of the panel light and the ceiling light between modes is controlled through an application, an on- fixture dimmer, a wall dimmer, or a timer synched to the date/time.
Claim 9 states,
(25) wherein said panel light and said ceiling light vary between different spectrum and/or intensity modes, and wherein the transition of the panel light and the ceiling light between modes is controlled through an application, an on- fixture dimmer, a wall dimmer, or a timer synched to the date/time.
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) 21, 23, 25-27 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 111102498 A, of record) in view of Huh (KR 20120029740 A, of record).
Regarding claim 21, Cai discloses an artificial sunlight system for wall installation comprising: one or more modules configured for installation on a wall, each module comprising at least the following, at least one panel (232), said panel having first (238) and second (236) ends and an emission surface (233) for emitting panel light, and said panel being configured to emit said panel light (L1) away from said wall when said module is installed on said wall (Fig. 18). Cai fails to exemplify at least one ceiling light emitter being configured to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling when said module is installed on said wall.
Huh discloses a sunlight system for wall installation comprising at least one ceiling light emitter (210), said ceiling light emitter being configured to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling when said light emitter is installed on said wall (Fig. 6b). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate the ceiling light emitter as disclosed by Huh in the artificial sunlight system of Cai in order to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling and thus provide indirect light towards a ceiling of the room.
Regarding claim 23, Cai in view of Huh discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said ceiling light is uniform (Fig. 20, ¶s[0110-0111]).
Regarding claim 25, Cai discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said panel light is configured in one or more of the following ways: to be uniform; to have a gradient in color, to have a gradient of intensity; to be patterned; or to dynamically display images (Fig. 20, ¶[0110-0111]).
Regarding claim 26, Cai discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said first end (238) is the top and said second end (236) is at the bottom when a frame (3) is installed in said wall (Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 27, Cai discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein panel light source and said ceiling light emitter operate in at least a high circadian stimulation (CS) mode and a low CS mode (¶[0101]).
Regarding claim 35, Cai fails to exemplify wherein one or more modules comprises multiple modules, wherein said multiple modules are synchronized to emulate multiple windows in a room. One skilled in the art would have reasonable contemplate providing multiple modules in order to adjust an occupied area of the artificial sunlight system to a desired size/configuration, as an obvious matter of design engineering. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate multiple modules in order to adjust an occupied area of the artificial sunlight system to a desired size/configuration, as an obvious matter of design engineering.
Claim(s) 21-23, 25-26 and 37-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fontoynont (EP 1371897 A1, of record) in view of Huh (KR 20120029740 A, of record).
Regarding claim 21, Fontoynont discloses an artificial sunlight system for wall installation comprising: one or more modules configured for installation on a wall, each module comprising at least the following, at least one panel (3), said panel having first and second ends and an emission surface for emitting panel light (Fig. 3), and said panel being configured to emit said panel light (D) away from said wall when said module is installed on said wall (Fig. 1). Fontoynont fails to exemplify said ceiling light emitter being configured to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling when said module is installed on said wall.
Huh discloses a sunlight system for wall installation comprising at least one ceiling light emitter (210), said ceiling light emitter being configured to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling when said light emitter is installed on said wall (Fig. 6b). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate the ceiling light emitter as disclosed by Huh in the artificial sunlight system of Fontoynont in order to emit ceiling light upward toward a ceiling and thus provide indirect light towards a ceiling of the room.
Regarding claim 22, Fontoynont in view of Huh exemplifies wherein each of the panel light and said ceiling light are capable of having different spectrum or intensity, but fails to exemplify wherein said panel light and said ceiling light are different in at least spectrum or intensity. One skilled in the art would have reasonable contemplate providing different spectrum or intensity between the panel light and said ceiling light in order to control the desired emission and aesthetic of the illumination system. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to provide the panel light and the ceiling light having different spectrum or intensity in order to control the desired emission and aesthetic of the illumination system.
Regarding claim 23, Fontoynont in view of Huh discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said ceiling light is uniform (Fig. 3, ¶[0031]).
Regarding claim 25, Fontoynont discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said panel light is configured in one or more of the following ways: to be uniform; to have a gradient in color, to have a gradient of intensity; to be patterned; or to dynamically display images (¶[0031]).
Regarding claim 26, Fontoynont discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said first end is the top and said second end is at the bottom when a frame is installed in said wall (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 37, Fontoynont discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said panel comprises a first end light source (S7) and a second end light source (S8), and a lightguide (5) optically coupled to said first and second end light sources, and configured for emitting light from said emission surface (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 38, Fontoynont discloses an artificial sunlight system wherein said first and second end light sources are bar lights (¶[0031]).
Regarding claim 39, Fontoynont in view of Huh exemplifies wherein said panel light and said ceiling light vary between different spectrum and/or intensity modes, and wherein the transition between said modes is controlled by a dimmer or a timer synced to an astronomical clock (¶s[0060-0062] of Fontoynont and ¶[0090] of Huh).
Regarding claim 40, Fontoynont in view of Huh exemplifies wherein said panel light and said ceiling light vary between different spectrum and/or intensity modes, and wherein the transition of the panel light and the ceiling light between modes is controlled through an application, an on-fixture dimmer, a wall dimmer, or a timer synched to the date/time (¶s[0060-0062] of Fontoynont and ¶[0090] of Huh).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hoffmann (DE 20114687 U1) discloses a virtual window device for illuminating and lighting surfaces and/or rooms.
Nishikawa et al. (JP 2024-173125 A) discloses a pseudo window illumination comprising a lighting fixture body with a frame-shaped plate part having an opening part in the center attached thereto, and a diffusion panel attached to the body side with respect to the opening part of the plate part.
Antonis et al. (WO 2006129268 A2) discloses an artificial window having one additional light source, e.g. LED, which is electrically connected to a set of driver, whose source is capable of radiating the light substantially in one direction.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 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 R. Greece, can be reached on (571) 272-3711. 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.
/Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
