DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the applicant's amendment submitted on 07/29/2026. In virtue of this amendment:
Claims 12-13 are canceled;
Claims 1 and 14-15 are currently amended; and thus,
Claims 1-11 and 14-18 are pending;
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 Objections
The objection to claims 12-13 for being duplicate of claims 6-7 is moot in view of cancellation of claims 12-13.
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 1-11 and 14-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 and 12-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,284,733. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims anticipates the claims of the instant application.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent 12,284,733
1. A programming device comprising:
a first configurable switch configured to receive a switch configuration from a user input;
a voltage divider electrically coupled between a first signal line configured to supply a first power signal and a common ground line, the voltage divider being configured to generate an attenuated signal based on the switch configuration; and
a shunt regulator coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to generate a programming signal based on the attenuated signal and to supply the programming signal to the first signal line, and
1. A programming device comprising:
a plurality of signal lines comprising a first signal line and a common ground line; and
a first programming circuit coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and comprising
a first configurable switch configured to receive a first switch configuration, the first programming circuit being configured to receive a first power signal from the first signal line and to supply a first programming signal to the first signal line, the first programming signal having a level corresponding to the first switch configuration, wherein the first programming circuit further comprising:
a voltage divider electrically coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to generate an attenuated signal based on the first switch configuration; and
a shunt regulator coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to generate the first programming signal based on the attenuated signal.
2. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the programming signal has a level corresponding to the switch configuration.
1. A programming device comprising:
…the first programming signal having a level corresponding to the first switch configuration …
3. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first power signal is a constant current signal, and the programming signal is a voltage signal.
2. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first power signal is a constant current signal, and the first programming signal is a voltage signal.
4. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first power signal has a first variance, and the programming signal has a second variance less than the first variance.
3. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first power signal has a first variance, and the first programming signal has a second variance less than the first variance.
5. The programming device of claim 4, wherein
the first variance is +/-10%, and the second variance is +/-0.5%.
4. The programming device of claim 3, wherein
the first variance is +/−10%, and the second variance is +/−0.5%.
6. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the programming signal comprises a fixed CCT signal for programming a CCT of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device.
5. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first programming signal comprises a fixed CCT signal for programming a CCT of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device.
7. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the programming signal comprises a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device.
6. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first programming signal comprises a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device.
8. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the voltage divider comprises the first configurable switch, and having a variable resistance based on the switch configuration.
7. The programming device of claim 1, wherein
the voltage divider comprises the first configurable switch, and having a variable resistance based on the first switch configuration.
9. The programming device of claim 1, wherein the voltage divider comprises:
a first resistor coupled between a first node and the common ground line; and a variable resistor coupled between the first signal line and the first node, the variable resistor comprising the first configurable switch and having a resistance based on the switch configuration.
8. The programming device of claim 1, wherein the voltage divider comprises:
a first resistor coupled between a first node and the common ground line; and a variable resistor coupled between the first signal line and the first node, the variable resistor comprising the first configurable switch and having a resistance based on the first switch configuration.
10. The programming device of claim 9, wherein the variable resistor comprises:
a plurality of selection resistors electrically coupled in series with one another, each selection resistor of the selection resistors comprising:
a resistor; and
a switch of a plurality of switches of the first configurable switch, the switch being electrically coupled in parallel with the resistor, and configured to short across the resistor in response to being activated.
9. The programming device of claim 8, wherein the variable resistor comprises:
a plurality of selection resistors electrically coupled in series with one another, each selection resistor of the selection resistors comprising:
a resistor; and
a switch of a plurality of switches of the first configurable switch, the switch being electrically coupled in parallel with the resistor, and configured to short across the resistor in response to being activated.
11. The programming device of claim 9, wherein
the shunt regulator has a reference terminal coupled to the first node and configured to receive the attenuated signal,
a cathode terminal coupled to the first signal line, and an anode terminal coupled to the common ground line.
10. The programming device of claim 8, wherein
the shunt regulator has a reference terminal coupled to the first node and configured to receive the attenuated signal,
a cathode terminal coupled to the first signal line, and an anode terminal coupled to the common ground line.
14. The programming device of claim 1, further comprising:
a programming switch configured to selectively couple the first signal line to the common ground line to signal a light engine coupled to the first signal line to initiate programming mode.
13. The programming device of claim 11, further comprising:
a programming switch configured to selectively couple the first and second signal lines to the common ground line to signal a light engine coupled to the first and second signal lines to initiate programming mode.
15. A lighting system comprising:
a programming device comprising:
a first configurable switch configured to receive a switch configuration from a user input;
a voltage divider electrically coupled between a first signal line configured to supply a first power signal and a common ground line, the voltage divider being configured to
generate an attenuated signal based on the switch configuration; and
a shunt regulator coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to generate a programming signal based on the attenuated signal and to supply the programming signal to the first signal line; and
a programmable light engine coupled to the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to supply the first power signal to the first signal line, to receive the programming signal, and to emit light according to the programming signal.
14. A lighting system comprising:
a programming device comprising:
a plurality of signal lines comprising a first signal line and a common ground line; and
a first programming circuit coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and comprising
a first configurable switch configured to receive a first switch configuration, the first programming circuit being configured to receive a first power signal from the first signal line and to supply a first programming signal to the first signal line, the first programming signal having a level corresponding to the first switch configuration; and wherein the first programming circuit further comprising:
a voltage divider electrically coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to
generate an attenuated signal based on the first switch configuration; and
a shunt regulator coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line, and configured to generate the first programming signal based on the attenuated signal
a programmable light engine coupled to the plurality of signal lines and configured to supply the first power signal to the first signal line, to receive the first programming signal, and to emit light according to the first programming signal
16. The lighting system of claim 15, wherein
the programming signal comprises one of a fixed CCT signal for programming a correlated color temperature (CCT) of an output light of the programmable light engine and a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of the output light of the programmable light engine.
15. The lighting system of claim 14, wherein
the first programming signal comprises one of a fixed CCT signal for programming a correlated color temperature (CCT) of an output light of the programmable light engine and a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of the output light of the programmable light engine.
17. The lighting system of claim 15, wherein
the first power signal is a constant current signal having a first variance, and the programming signal is a voltage signal having a second variance less than the first variance, and wherein the first variance is +/-10%, and the second variance is +/-0.5%.
16. The lighting system of claim 14, wherein
the first power signal is a constant current signal having a first variance, and the first programming signal is a voltage signal having a second variance less than the first variance, and wherein the first variance is +/−10%, and the second variance is +/−0.5%.
18. The lighting system of claim 15, wherein the programming device further comprises:
a programming switch configured to selectively couple the first signal line to the common ground line to signal the programmable light engine to initiate programming mode.
17. The lighting system of claim 14, wherein the programming device further comprises:
a programming switch configured to selectively couple the first signal line to the common ground line to signal the programmable light engine to initiate programming mode.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5, 7-10 13, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2020/0053849A1 hereinafter “Chowdhury” in view of US2015/0312987A1 hereinafter “Gibbs”
Regarding claim 1, Chowdhury discloses a programming device (¶3L3-4: a programmable device) comprising:
a first configurable switch (¶47L8: switch [521, 522]) configured to receive a switch configuration from a user input (¶18L4-6: different selection of switches in switch bank cause different configuration);
a voltage divider (¶50L5-6: resistance value of resistors [510, 511, 512]) electrically coupled between a first signal line configured to supply a first power signal (¶49L7-8: input receive a particular resistance as determine by resistor and switches) and a common ground line (as shown in Fig.5 for example),
the voltage divider being configured to generate an attenuated signal based on the switch configuration (¶49L7-8: input receive a particular resistance as determine by resistor and switches); and
a regulator (¶47L7: current regulator) coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line (as shown in Fig.5 for example), and configured to generate a programming signal based on the attenuated signal (¶51L4-6: the current regulator output an amount of current necessary to cause LED group to output an medium output)
Chowdhury does not explicitly disclose the regulator is a shunt regulator.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to modify the current regulator disclosed by Chowdhury to be a shut regulator as disclosed in Fig.3 of Gibbs. (¶38L2—4: the current regulator is formed as a shunt voltage regulator)
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because a shunt regulator is well known in the art, and provides simple, cost-effect and highly reliable voltage stabilization.
Chowdhury in view of Gibbs hereinafter “Chowdhury/Gibbs” discloses
the shunt regulator is configured to supply the programming signal to the first signal line.
Since the current regulator [506] of Chowdhury is replaced with the current regulator [102] of Gibbs; it can be understood that Resistor [508] of Chowdhury that is connected to the LED [501] and Constant Voltage Diver [505] is equivalent to Resistor [R11] connected to LED [601] and Rectifier [600] of Gibbs; thus the node between Resistor [R11] and base of transistor [Q1] or Gibbs can be pin 1 of current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
The collector of transistor [Q1] is connected to LED [601]of Gibbs, thus that node can be pin 5 of (middle pin [5]) current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
The collector control point [500] of Gibbs is connected to output of OVD [103], thus can be connected to output of resistor [510-512] and switch [521-522] to pin 5 and pin 6 current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
In such configuration, the shunt voltage regulator [U1] of Gibbs, will provide control signal based on output of another circuit to the base of transistor [Q1] to control current of LED [601])
Regarding claim 2, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1, wherein
the programming signal has a level corresponding to the switch configuration. (¶50L1-8: combination of switch results in different confirmation of intensity)
Regarding claim 3, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1, wherein
the first power signal is a constant current signal (¶49L1-8: current regulator provides a configurable current), and the programming signal is a voltage signal (¶49L1-8: input connects to constant voltage driver).
Regarding claim 4, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses the programming device of claim 1,
the first power signal has a first variance, and the programming signal has a second variance less than the first variance.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to recognize that any signal would inherently have a variance to and would be motivated to decrease the variance to the signal as much as possible.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 5, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses the programming device of claim 4,
Chowdhury/Gibbs does not explicitly disclose:
the first variance is +/-10%, and the second variance is +/-0.5%.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to recognize that any signal would inherently have a variance to and would be motivated to decrease the variance to the signal as much as possible.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 7, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1, wherein
the programming signal comprises a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device. (¶50L1-3: as depicted in Table 4, the combination of switch results in three different configuration of intensity)
Regarding claim 8, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1, wherein
the voltage divider comprises the first configurable switch, and having a variable resistance based on the switch configuration. (Chowdhury ¶34L1-8: resistors [310-312], switch [321, 322]; ¶35L1-14: driver is configurable by switch; different configuration of resistor cause different combination of resistance to be presented to driver)
Regarding claim 9, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1, wherein
the voltage divider comprises: a first resistor coupled between a first node and the common ground line; and a variable resistor coupled between the first signal line and the first node, the variable resistor comprising the first configurable switch and having a resistance based on the switch configuration. (as shown in Fig.5 for example)
Regarding claim 10, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 9, wherein the variable resistor comprises:
a plurality of selection resistors electrically coupled in series with one another, each selection resistor of the selection resistors comprising:
a resistor; and
a switch of a plurality of switches of the first configurable switch, the switch being electrically coupled in parallel with the resistor, and configured to short across the resistor in response to being activated. (as shown in Fig.5 for example)
Regarding claim 13, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1, wherein
the programming signal comprises a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device. (¶50L1-3: as depicted in Table 4, the combination of switch results in three different configuration of intensity)
Regarding claim 15, Chowdhury discloses a lighting system comprising:
a programming device (¶3L3-4: a programmable device) comprising:
a first configurable switch (¶47L8: switch [521, 522]) configured to receive a switch configuration from a user input (¶18L4-6: different selection of switches in switch bank cause different configuration);
a voltage divider (¶50L5-6: resistance value of resistors [510, 511, 512]) electrically coupled between a first signal line configured to supply a first power signal (¶49L7-8: input receive a particular resistance as determine by resistor and switches) and a common ground line (as shown in Fig.5 for example),
the voltage divider being configured to generate an attenuated signal based on the switch configuration (¶49L7-8: input receive a particular resistance as determine by resistor and switches); and
a regulator (¶47L7: current regulator) coupled between the first signal line and the common ground line (as shown in Fig.5 for example), and configured to generate a programming signal based on the attenuated signal (¶51L4-6: the current regulator output an amount of current necessary to cause LED group to output an medium output); and
a programmable light engine (¶48L2: LED group) coupled to the first signal line and the common ground line (as shown Fig.5), and configured to supply the first power signal to the first signal line, to receive the programming signal, and to emit light according to the programming signal. (¶51L4-6: the current regulator output an amount of current necessary to cause LED group to output an medium output).
Chowdhury does not explicitly disclose the regulator is a shunt regulator.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to modify the current regulator disclosed by Chowdhury to be a shut regulator as disclosed in R38 an Fig.3 of Gibbs. (¶38L2—4: the current regulator is formed as a shunt voltage regulator)
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because a shunt regulator is well known in the art, and provides simple, cost-effect and highly reliable voltage stabilization.
Chowdhury in view of Gibbs hereinafter “Chowdhury/Gibbs” discloses
the shunt regulator is configured to supply the programming signal to the first signal line.
Since the current regulator [506] of Chowdhury is replaced with the current regulator [102] of Gibbs; it can be understood that Resistor [508] of Chowdhury that is connected to the LED [501] and Constant Voltage Diver [505] is equivalent to Resistor [R11] connected to LED [601] and Rectifier [600] of Gibbs; thus the node between Resistor [R11] and base of transistor [Q1] or Gibbs can be pin 1 of current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
The collector of transistor [Q1] is connected to LED [601]of Gibbs, thus that node can be pin 5 of (middle pin [5]) current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
The collector control point [500] of Gibbs is connected to output of OVD [103], thus can be connected to output of resistor [510-512] and switch [521-522] to pin 5 and pin 6 current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
In such configuration, the shunt voltage regulator [U1] of Gibbs, will provide control signal based on output of another circuit to the base of transistor [Q1] to control current of LED [601])
Regarding claim 17, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the lighting system of claim 15, wherein the first power signal is a constant current signal (¶49L1-8: current regulator provides a configurable current), and the programming signal is a voltage signal (¶49L1-8: input connects to constant voltage driver).
Chowdhury/Gibbs does not explicitly disclose:
the first power signal having a first variance, and the programming signal having a second variance less than the first variance, and wherein the first variance is +/-10%, and the second variance is +/-0.5%.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to recognize that any signal would inherently have a variance to and would be motivated to decrease the variance to the signal as much as possible.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 6 and 16 and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chowdhury/Gibbs in view of US2021/0136888A1 hereinafter “Vasquez”
Regarding claim 6, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses in Chowdhury the programming device of claim 1,
Chowdhury/Gibbs does not explicitly disclose:
the programming signal comprises a fixed CCT signal for programming a CCT of an output light of a programmable light engine coupled to the programming device.
Vasquez discloses a controller for a light fixture wherein a controller with selection switch receives power signal and output programming signal corresponding to switch configuration to control a CCT of a light engine. (Fig.4A for example, ¶40L1-21: a pulse-width modulator circuit for the controller; receives the regulator voltage and provide PWM signal to the switching circuit based on color temperature select switch); ¶22L116-21: the dimming and CCT tuning control circuit receiving dimming and CCT tuning signals from the dimming input and the CCT tuning input and generating at least two sets of modulated PWM signals associated with the dimming and CCT tuning signals)
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to utilize the switch configuration disclosed by Vasquez as the CCT input in addition to the intensity control disclosed by Chowdhury.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because it provides an easy way for the user to select the desired CCT signal by simply selecting it using the switch.
Regarding claim 16, Chowdhury/Gibbs discloses the lighting system of claim 15,
Chowdhury/Gibbs does not explicitly disclose:
the programming signal comprises one of a fixed CCT signal for programming a correlated color temperature (CCT) of an output light of the programmable light engine and a fixed dimmer signal for programming a dimming level of the output light of the programmable light engine.
Vasquez discloses a controller for a light fixture wherein a controller with selection switch receives power signal and output programming signal corresponding to switch configuration to control a CCT of a light engine. (Fig.4A for example, ¶40L1-21: a pulse-width modulator circuit for the controller; receives the regulator voltage and provide PWM signal to the switching circuit based on color temperature select switch); ¶22L116-21: the dimming and CCT tuning control circuit receiving dimming and CCT tuning signals from the dimming input and the CCT tuning input and generating at least two sets of modulated PWM signals associated with the dimming and CCT tuning signals)
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to utilize the switch configuration disclosed by Vasquez as the CCT input in addition to the intensity control disclosed by Chowdhury.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chowdhury/Gibbs in view of Vasquez hereinafter “Chowdhury/Gibbs/Vasquez” in view of US2014/0368109A1 hereinafter “Goscha”
Regarding claim 14, Chowdhury/Gibbs/Vasquez discloses the programming device of claim 12,
Chowdhury/Gibbs/Vasquez does not explicitly disclose:
a programming switch configured to selectively couple the first signal line to the common ground line to signal a light engine coupled to the first signal line to initiate programming mode.
Goscha discloses a lighting system wherein a switch is use to enable/disable dimming functionality (¶183)
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to modify Chowdhury/Gibbs/Vasquez to incorporate the switch to enable/disable dimming functionality as disclosed by Goscha.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because it provide a power saving as the result of disabling a dimming functionality, (Goscha ¶183)
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chowdhury/Gibbs in view of Vasquez hereinafter “Chowdhury/Gibbs” in view of Goscha.
Regarding claim 18, Chowdhury/Gibbs/Vasquez discloses the lighting system of claim 15,
Chowdhury/Gibbs does not explicitly disclose:
a programming switch configured to selectively couple the first signal line to the common ground line to signal a light engine coupled to the first signal line to initiate programming mode.
Goscha discloses a lighting system wherein a switch is use to enable/disable dimming functionality (¶183)
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to modify Chowdhury/Gibbs/Vasquez to incorporate the switch to enable/disable dimming functionality as disclosed by Goscha.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because it provide a power saving as the result of disabling a dimming functionality, (Goscha ¶183)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, the applicant argued Chowdhury does not disclose the shunt regulator is configured to supply the programming signal to the first signal line; which amounts to arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Chowdhury in view of Gibbs hereinafter “Chowdhury/Gibbs” discloses
the shunt regulator is configured to supply the programming signal to the first signal line.
Since the current regulator [506] of Chowdhury is replaced with the current regulator [102] of Gibbs; it can be understood that Resistor [508] of Chowdhury that is connected to the LED [501] and Constant Voltage Diver [505] is equivalent to Resistor [R11] connected to LED [601] and Rectifier [600] of Gibbs; thus the node between Resistor [R11] and base of transistor [Q1] or Gibbs can be pin 1 of current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
The collector of transistor [Q1] is connected to LED [601]of Gibbs, thus that node can be pin 5 of (middle pin [5]) current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
The collector control point [500] of Gibbs is connected to output of OVD [103], thus can be connected to output of resistor [510-512] and switch [521-522] to pin 5 and pin 6 current regulator [506] of Chowdhury.
In such configuration, the shunt voltage regulator [U1] of Gibbs, will provide control signal based on output of another circuit to the base of transistor [Q1] to control current of LED [601])
For the at least foregoing reason, the rejection is maintained.
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 RAYMOND R CHAI whose telephone number is (571)270-0576. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:00PM.
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 571-242-8048. 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.
/Raymond R Chai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
