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
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) 6, 7, 11, 14, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rothbauer et al. (US 2025/0216060) in view of Amrine, Jr. et al. (US 2014/0268727 Hereinafter Amrine).
Regarding claim 6, Rothbauer teaches a lighting system for connecting to an existing track receiver affixed between two panels, said track receiver having a barb receiving portion (30, Fig. 6A) formed from a pair of upstanding parallel walls (34, Fig. 6A), said barb receiving portion protruding through a gap between said two panels (18, Fig. 6A), said lighting system comprising:
a snap track (40, Fig. 3) having a trough portion (68, Fig. 6A) and a barb (70, Fig. 6A) extending therefrom for engaging with said track receiver, said snap track having a first arcuate portion (44 on the left side, Fig. 6A) connected to a left side of said trough portion (Fig. 6A) and a second arcuate portion (44 on the right, Fig. 6A) connected to a right side of said trough portion (Fig. 6A), said first and second arcuate portions resiliently deformable between a resting position and a deflected position (Fig. 6A), a portion of said first and second arcuate portions extending over said trough portion to form a mouth (the opening between 54, Fig. 6A), said mouth being more narrow than said trough portion (Fig. 6A);
a luminaire strip (80, Fig. 2) having a resilient exterior (the case of 80, Fig. 6A) enclosing an elongate LED strip (the led strip being shown inside in Fig. 6A), said resilient exterior having side profile surfaces complementary to said trough portion (Fig. 6A); and
when said luminaire strip is located in said trough portion (Fig. 6A).
Rothbauer fails to teach a diffuser surface on said resilient exterior is proud of said arcuate portions.
Amrine teaches a diffuser surface (712, Fig. 7, Paragraph 0060) on said resilient exterior is proud of said snap track (702-706, Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to have modified the elongated luminaire strip of Rothbauer to have the diffusion lens which protrudes beyond the arcuate portions of Rothbauer, in order to provide illumination in more directions and provide a more diffused light to the area being illuminated.
Regarding claim 7, Rothbauer teaches a cover (the housing for 84 provided generally at both ends of 80, Fig. 2), said cover having an outwardly facing surface and side profile surfaces matching said side profile surfaces and said diffuser surface (89, Fig. 6A) on said luminaire strip.
Regarding claim 11, Rothbauer fails to teach the required limitations.
Amrine teaches said resilient exterior has a diffuser portion (712, Fig. 7) joined to a director portion (the arms protruding up from 706, Fig. 7) at a V-shaped angled transition, said diffuser portion being less opaque than said director portion (Fig. 7), said diffuser surface is located on said diffuser portion (Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to have modified the resilient exterior portion of Rothbauer as provided by Amrine, in order to provide a specific light distribution as desired for a specific light distribution.
Regarding claim 14, Rothbauer teaches a lighting system in combination with a first panel (18 on the left, Fig. 4) and a second panel (18 on the right, Fig. 4), said first panel fixed with respect to and spaced from said second panel to form a gap (where 34 is located, Fig. 4) therebetween, said lighting system comprising:
a track receiver (26, Fig. 6A) having a flange portion (the left and right sides of the base 36, Fig. 6a) and a barb receiving portion (38, Fig. 6A, Paragraph 0021) extending perpendicularly therefrom, said barb receiving portion extending through said gap and having a pair of upstanding parallel walls (34, Fig. 6A) with protrusions (38, Fig. 6A) on one of said upstanding walls facing protrusions on a second of said upstanding walls;
a snap track (40, Fig. 3) having a trough portion (68, Fig. 6A), a first resilient arcuate portion (44 on the left side, Fig. 6A) extending from one side of said trough portion, a second resilient arcuate portion (44 on the right, Fig. 6A) extending from an opposite side of said trough portion, said trough portion having a mouth (area between 54, Fig. 6A) defining an opening to a valley (inside of 68 below 54), said mouth having a width being narrower than a width of said valley (Fig. 6A);
an elongate luminaire strip (80, Fig. 3) having a first side profile surface (left side shown in Fig. 6A), a second side profile surface (right side, Fig. 6A), a lens surface (98, Fig. 6A) extending between said profile surfaces, and a back surface (back side of 80, Fig.6A) located opposite said diffuser surface;
said elongate luminaire strip is releasably retained in said trough portion without adhesive when said grooves are located in said mouth (Fig. 6A);
when said snap track is retained by said track receiver, said first resilient arcuate portion is in biased contact with said first panel and said second resilient arcuate portion is in biased contact with said second panel (Fig. 6A).
Rothbauer fails to teach a diffuser surface and each said side profile surface having a groove; said diffuser surface is proud of said first and second resilient arcuate portions.
Amrine teaches a diffuser surface (712, Fig. 7, Paragraph 0060) and each said side profile surface having a groove (the groove that 712 is located in, Fig. 7); said diffuser surface is proud of said first and second resilient arcuate portions (702 and 704).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to have modified the elongated luminaire strip of Rothbauer to have the diffusion lens which protrudes beyond the arcuate portions of Rothbauer, in order to provide illumination in more directions and provide a more diffused light to the area being illuminated.
Regarding claim 16, Rothbauer teaches said luminaire strip is retained in said snap track, said snap track is in biased contact with said luminaire strip (Fig. 6A).
Regarding claim 18, Rothbauer teaches said elongate luminaire strip is formed from a resilient material (Paragraph 0024).
Rothbauer fails to teach the specifics of diffusion.
Amrine teaches translucent portion (the top of 712, Fig. 7) joined to a director portion (the arms of 712 slanted towards the substrate, Fig. 7), said diffuser portion being less opaque than said director portion (specifically the area above is less opaque due to more light being trapped in the slanted sections, Fig. 7), said diffuser surface is located on said diffuser portion, said diffuser portion being less opaque than said director portion, said diffuser surface is located on said diffuser portion (Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to have modified the shape of the elongated luminaire strip of Rothbauer as taught by Amrine, in order to provide a desired light distribution as required for a given application.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rothbauer et al. (US 2025/0216060) in view of Amrine, Jr. et al. (US 2014/0268727 Hereinafter Amrine) and further in view of Kramer et al. (US 2019/0128509 Hereinafter Kramer).
Regarding claim 8, Rothbauer fails to teach said side profile surfaces each having a groove, said mouth engaged with said grooves to retain said luminaire strip in said snap track.
Kramer teaches said side profile surfaces each having a groove (2c, Fig. AA), said mouth (Ad, Fig. AA) engaged with said grooves to retain said luminaire strip in said snap track (Fig. AA).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to have modified the surfaces of said luminaire strip to have grooves to accommodate the mouth of the grooves, in order to allow for the illumination strip to protrude from the mouth to allow for the lighting device to provide more distributed illumination of the area being illuminated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-5 allowed.
Claims 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 19, 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 taken as a whole does not show nor suggest all of the limitations of independent claim 1, and 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20 as specifically called for the claimed combinations.
The closest prior art, Rothbauer (US 2025/0216060) teaches several limitations and their specifics as rejected above.
However Rothbauer fails to disclose all the specifics of the elongate luminaire strip required in claim 1 and the specifics of the end cap required in claims as required by the claim and there is no motivation absent the applicant' s own disclosure, to modify the Rothbauer reference in the manner required by the claims.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Simon et al. (US 2014/0009926) and Chen et al. (US 2014/0140074) teach a member with chamfer surfaces and a lens that is attached.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC T EIDE whose telephone number is (571)272-7405. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM.
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, Jong-Suk (James) 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.
/ERIC T EIDE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2875