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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on January 13 and June 25 of 2026, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. If a satisfactory title is not supplied by the applicant, the examiner may, at the time of allowance, change the title by an examiner’s amendment, per MPEP 606.01. Any changes to claim scope at time of allowance may also result in an additional title amendment.
At this time, the following title is suggested: Light Tube with a Multi-Section Light Adjustment Portion.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “corrugated portion” being disposed on both the inner and outer walls of the “inner tube” (as defined in Claim 4) must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because they include grammatical, syntax, and/or typographical errors, or redundant/verbose language. Appropriate correction is required to place the claims in proper form for allowance (see proposed claim amendment, below).
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 is indefinite as the arrangement intended to be defined by the recitation “the corrugated portion is corresponding to one side of the light source board” could not be readily ascertained within the context of the claim. The applicant is advised that, in comparing the claimed invention with the Prior Art, the Examiner assumed, based on the originally filed description and drawings, the claimed “corrugated portion” as arranged such as to face the “light source board”.
Dependent claims 2-10 are rejected at least for their dependency on indefinite independent claim 1, as detailed above.
Dependent claim 8 is indefinite as the recitations “the first upper plate is parallel to a vertical reference plane”, “the first lower plane is parallel to a horizontal reference plane”, “the second upper plate is parallel to the vertical reference plane”, and “the second lower plane is parallel to the horizontal reference plane” attempt to define the spatial arrangement of structural elements based on external relative orientations. Would the claimed invention suddenly become a different invention if rotated 90°? The applicant is advised that, in comparing the claimed invention with the Prior Art, the Examiner assumed, based on the originally filed description and drawings, the claimed “first upper plate” and the “second upper plate” as arranged substantially parallel to an emission axis of the light source board, with the “first lower plate” and the “second lower plate” arranged to be substantially transverse to the emission axis of the light source board.
Dependent claim 9 is indefinite as the recitations “the first upper plate is not parallel to a vertical reference plane”, “the first lower plane is not parallel to a horizontal reference plane”, “the second upper plate is not parallel to the vertical reference plane”, and “the second lower plane is not parallel to the horizontal reference plane” attempt to define the spatial arrangement of structural elements based on external relative orientations. Would the claimed invention suddenly become a different invention if rotated 90°? The applicant is advised that, in comparing the claimed invention with the Prior Art, the Examiner assumed, based on the originally filed description and drawings, the claimed “first upper plate” and the “second upper plate” as arranged not parallel to an emission axis of the light source board, with the “first lower plate” and the “second lower plate” arranged to be not transverse to the emission axis of the light source board.
Independent claim 10 is indefinite as the arrangement intended to be defined by the recitation “the first light adjustment portions and the second light adjustment portion are inclined surfaces” could not be readily ascertained within the context of the claim. The applicant is advised that, in comparing the claimed invention with the Prior Art, the Examiner assumed, based on the originally filed description and drawings, the claimed “light adjustment portions” as arranged at an angle to an emission axis of the “light source board”.
Proposed Claim Amendments
The Examiner respectfully suggests amending the claims as indicated below. The applicant is advised that, if the proposed amendments are accepted, all claims must be carefully reviewed to reflect and/or accommodate the new language.
CLAIM 1. A light tube
an outer tube;
an inner tube disposed inside the outer tube, and comprising a mounting base, a first light adjustment portion, a second light adjustment portion, and a corrugated portion, wherein the mounting base, the first light adjustment portion, and the second light adjustment portion are disposed on an inner wall of the inner tube, and the corrugated portion and the mounting base are disposed between the first light adjustment portion and the second light adjustment portion; and
a light source board disposed on the mounting base, wherein the corrugated portion arranged to face the light source board;
wherein the first light adjustment portion has a plurality of first prism steps arranged in sequence, the second light adjustment portion has a plurality of second prism steps arranged in sequence, and the corrugated portion has a corrugated structure.
CLAIM 2. The light
CLAIM 3. The light tube
CLAIM 4. The light tube
CLAIM 5. The light tube each defining an arch-shaped top
CLAIM 6. The light tube plurality of flat portions, and the protrusion portions and the flat portions are alternately arranged.
CLAIM 7. The light tube
CLAIM 8. The light tube light source board defines an emission axis, the first upper plane is disposed substantially parallel to the emission axis, the first lower plane is disposed substantially transverse to the emission axis, the second upper plane disposed substantially parallel to the emission axis, and the second lower plane is disposed substantially transverse to the emission axis.
CLAIM 9. The light tube light source board defines an emission axis, the first upper plane is disposed substantially not parallel to the emission axis, the first lower plane is disposed substantially not transverse to the emission axis, the second upper plane is disposed substantially not parallel to the emission axis, and the second lower plane is disposed substantially not transverse to the emission axis
CLAIM 10. The light tube light source board defines an emission axis, the first light adjustment portion and the second light adjustment portion are arranged at an angle relative to the emission axis
Claim Rejections Based on Prior Art
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 1-3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JIANG et al. (U.S. Pat. 10,514,134).
Regarding independent claim 1 (as best understood), JIANG et al. discloses a light tube (as seen in Figure 29C) with a multi-layer optical medium structure 1 (as seen in Figure 31), including an outer tube 19 (as seen in Figure 31); an inner tube 1 (as seen in Figure 31) disposed inside the outer tube 19 (as seen in Figure 31), and having a mounting base 2 (bottom portion of element 1 receiving element 2, as seen in Figure 31), a first light adjustment portion 17 (left side portion of element 17, as seen in Figure 31), a second light adjustment portion 17 (right side portion of element 17, as seen in Figure 31), and a corrugated portion 17 (top portion of element 17, as seen in Figure 31), wherein the mounting base 2, the first light adjustment portion 17, and the second light adjustment portion 17 are disposed on an inner wall of the inner tube 1 (as seen in Figure 31), and the corrugated portion 17 and the mounting base 2 are disposed between the first light adjustment portion 17 and the second light adjustment portion 27 (as seen in Figure 31); and a light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 31) disposed on the mounting base 2 (as seen in Figure 31), wherein the corrugated portion 17 is corresponding to one side of the light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 31); wherein the first light adjustment portion 17 has a plurality of first prism steps 17 (as seen in Figure 31) arranged in sequence, the second light adjustment portion 17 has a plurality of second prism steps 17 (as seen in Figure 31) arranged in sequence, and the corrugated portion 17 has a corrugated structure 17 (as seen in Figure 31).
PNG
media_image1.png
537
874
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 31 of JIAN et al. (U.S. Pat. 10,514,134), simplified and annotated to clearly reference claimed structural elements and features.
Regarding dependent claim 2 (as best understood), JIANG et al. further discloses the outer tube 19 is cylindrical (as seen in Figure 29C).
Regarding dependent claim 3 (as best understood), JIANG et al. further discloses the corrugated portion 17 is disposed on the inner wall (as seen in Figure 31) or an outer wall of the inner tube 1 (as seen in Figure 31).
Regarding dependent claim 10 (as best understood), JIANG et al. further discloses the first light adjustment portion 17 and the second light adjustment portion 17 are inclined surfaces 17 (the left and right sides of element 17 are disposed at an angle to the emission axis of element 2, as seen in Figure 31), and the corrugated portion 17 is arc-shaped (the top portion of element 17 is shaped as an arc, as seen in Figure 31).
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.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIANG et al. (U.S. Pat. 10,514,134) in view of SHIGEMATSU (U.S. Pat. 9,557,014).
Regarding dependent claim 4 (as best understood), JIANG et al. discloses most of the limitations of the claim (as previously detailed), and further discloses the corrugated portion 17 is disposed on the inner wall of the inner tube 1 (as seen in Figure 31).
JIANG et al. fails to disclose the corrugated portion 17 being provided also on an outer wall of the inner tube 1.
However, SHIGEMATSU discloses a light tube 1 (as seen in Figure 1) including an outer tube 4 (as seen in Figure 1); and inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed inside the outer tube 4 (as seen in Figure 1); and a light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed inside the inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 19), wherein a corrugated portion 22A (as seen in Figure 19) is provided on an outer surface of the inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the Prior Art external corrugated portion 22A of SHIGEMATSU et al. with the patented internally corrugated portion 17 of JIANG et al., according to the known methods taught by SHIGEMATSU, to yield the predictable result of providing a corrugated portion on both the inner and outer surfaces of the inner tube 1, as necessitated by the specific illumination requirements of a given application (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397).
Regarding dependent claim 5 (as best understood), JIANG et al. discloses most of the limitations of the claim (as previously detailed), and further discloses the corrugated structure 17 includes a plurality of protrusion portions 17, and a top of each of the protrusion portions 17 being substantially a point (as seen in Figure 31).
JIANG et al. fails to disclose the top of each of the protrusion portions 17 being arc-shaped.
However, SHIGEMATSU discloses a light tube 1 (as seen in Figure 1) including an outer tube 4 (as seen in Figure 1); and inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed inside the outer tube 4 (as seen in Figure 1); and a light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed inside the inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 19), wherein corrugated portions 22A (as seen in Figure 19) including a plurality of protrusion portions 31 (as seen in Figure 19) each having an arc-shaped top (as seen in Figure 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the known arc-shaped protrusion portions 31 of SHIGEMATSU for the pointed protrusion portions 17 in the patented light tube of JIANG et al., to obtain the predictable result of providing a light output pattern, as necessitated by the specific illumination requirements of a given application (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385).
Regarding dependent claim 6 (as best understood), JIANG et al. explicitly discloses, or at least suggests when combined with the knowledge readily available to one of ordinary skill in the art (as previously detailed), and further disclosing a plurality of valleys (area between adjacent elements 17, as seen in Figure 31), and the protrusion portions 17 and the valleys being alternately arranged (as seen in Figure 31).
JIANG et al. fails to disclose the plurality of valleys being flat portions.
However, SHIGEMATSU discloses a light tube 1 (as seen in Figure 1) including an outer tube 4 (as seen in Figure 1); and inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed inside the outer tube 4 (as seen in Figure 1); and a light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed inside the inner tube 22 (as seen in Figure 19), wherein corrugated portions 22A (as seen in Figure 19) including a plurality of protrusion portions 31 (as seen in Figure 19) each having an arc-shaped top (as seen in Figure 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the known flat portions of the protrusion portions 31 of SHIGEMATSU for the valleys of the protrusion portions 17 in the patented light tube of JIANG et al., to obtain the predictable result of providing a light output pattern, as necessitated by the specific illumination requirements of a given application (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIANG et al. (U.S. Pat. 10,514,134) in view of CHEN (U.S. Pat. 8,118,448).
Regarding dependent claim 7 (as best understood), JIANG et al. discloses most of the limitations of the claim (as previously detailed), except each of the first prism steps 17 has a first upper plane and a first lower plane connected to each other, wherein a distance between the first upper plane and the light source board 2 is less than a distance between the first lower plane and the light source board 2, and each of the second prism steps has a second upper plane and a second lower plane connected to each other, wherein a distance between the second upper plane and the light source board 2 is less than a distance between the second lower plane and the light source board 2.
However, CHEN discloses a light tube having an outer tube 50 (as seen in Figure 1), and inner tube 60 (as seen in Figure 1) provided inside the outer tube 50 (as seen in Figure 1), and a light source board 62 (as seen in Figure 1) disposed in the inner tube 60 (as seen in Figure 1). The inner tube 60 having a mounting base 61 (as seen in Figure 4) for supporting the light source board 62 (as seen in Figure 4), a first light adjustment portion 100 (left side of element 100, as seen in Figure 4) positioned at one side of the light source board 62 (as seen in Figure 4), a second light adjustment portion 100 (right side of element 100, as seen in Figure 4) positioned at another side of the light source board 62 (as seen in Figure 4). The first and second light adjustment portions 100 (as seen in Figure 4) having a plurality of corresponding first and second prism steps 21 (elements 21 on the left and right side of element 100, as seen in Figure 5). The first prism steps 21 has a first upper plane 211 (elements 211 on the left side of element 21, as seen in Figure 5) and a first lower plane 212 (elements 212 on the left side of element 21, as seen in Figure 5) connected to each other (as seen in Figure 5), wherein a distance between the first upper plane 211 and the light source board 2 is less than a distance between the first lower plane 212 and the light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 5), and each of the second prism steps 21 has a second upper plane 211 (elements 211 on the right side of element 21, as seen in Figure 5) and a second lower plane 212 (elements 212 on the right side of element 21, as seen in Figure 5) connected to each other (as seen in Figure 5), wherein a distance between the second upper plane 211 and the light source board 2 is less than a distance between the second lower plane 212 and the light source board 2 (as seen in Figure 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the Prior Art first and second light adjustment portions 100 of CHEN with the patented inner light tube 1 of JIANG et al., according to known methods, to yield the predictable result of providing a light output pattern, as necessitated by the specific illumination requirements of a given application (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397).
Regarding dependent claim 8 (as best understood), JIANG et al. individually disclose, or at least suggests when combined with CHEN (as previously detailed), all the limitations of the claims, with CHEN further disclosing the first upper plane 211 is parallel to a vertical reference plane (as evidenced by Figure 5), the first lower plane 212 is parallel to a horizontal reference plane (as evidenced by Figure 5), the second upper plane 211 is parallel to the vertical reference plane (as evidenced by Figure 5), and the second lower plane 212 is parallel to the horizontal reference plane (as evidenced by Figure 5).
Regarding dependent claim 8 (as best understood), JIANG et al. individually disclose, or at least suggests when combined with CHEN (as previously detailed), all the limitations of the claims, except explicitly disclosing the first upper plane 212 is not parallel to a vertical reference plane, the first lower plane 211 is not parallel to a horizontal reference plane, the second upper plane 212 is not parallel to the vertical reference plane, and the second lower plane 211 is not parallel to the horizontal reference plane.
However, the examiner takes Official Notice of the use and advantages of rotating an illumination device, specifically a light tube, are old and well known in the illumination art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to simply include a rotate the light tube of JIANG et al. (as previously modified by CHEN), to orient the first and second upper planes 212 to not be parallel to a vertical reference plane, and the first and second lower planes 211 to not be parallel to a horizontal reference plane, to obtain the predictable result of enabling the apparatus to project light in a desired direction, as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bloomfield (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2005/0242711), Siemiet et al. (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2009/0161359), Oki (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2010/0253226), Ivey (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2010/0321921), Uang et al. (U.S. Pat. 7,976,185), Lai et al. (U.S. Pat. 8,220,956), Osawa (U.S. Pat. 8,425,081), Lee et al. (U.S. Pat. 8,602,587), Tseng et al. (U.S. Pat. 9,664,355), and Wang (U.S. Pat. 11,085,592) disclose light tubes including an outer housing member, an inner housing member, at least one light source board provided inside the inner housing member on a mount portion, a light adjustment member provided inside the inner housing member and configured to modify the light output of the light source board into a desire illumination output.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISMAEL NEGRON whose telephone number is (571)272-2376. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jong-Suk Lee, can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/ISMAEL NEGRON/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights