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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed 2/17/2025 has been entered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 2/17/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
In this case, while a machine translation and explanation of relevance of the cited reference CN 106363899 have been provided, no copy of the published foreign reference itself was provided, and therefore this reference only has not been considered.
Specification
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.
At this time, the following title is suggested: LIGHT GENERATING SYSTEM COMPRISING A CURVED OPTICAL WINDOW.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6-8, and 11-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “wherein the curved optical window having a maximum height (hx), a minimum height (hm), and a radius (r1)” in lines 7-8 of the claim is grammatically incorrect. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --wherein the curved optical window has x), a minimum height (hm), and a radius (r1)-- to correct the verb tense.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “wherein a thickness (h) of the curved optical window gradually increases from the minimum height (hm) to maximum height (hx)” in lines 8-9 of the claim is grammatically incorrect. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --wherein a thickness (h) of the curved optical window gradually increases from the minimum height (hm) to the maximum height (hx)-- to correct the typographical error.
Claims 6-7 each recite the limitation “the range of 20-4000 nm” in lines 2-3 of Claim 6 and line 6 of Claim 7, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Since the intended scope of the claims is clear, this does not create an issue of antecedent basis under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). However, the Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --a
Claims 8 and 11 each recite the limitation “the range of 0.9*1-3 mm” in line 2 of both claims. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Since the intended scope of the claims is clear, this does not create an issue of indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). However, the Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --a
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the visible wavelength range” in line 5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Since the intended scope of the claim is clear, this does not create an issue of indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). However, the Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --a .
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2, 4-5, 7, 13, and 15 are 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.
Claims 2 and 7 are rejected as being indefinite as it is not clear if the recitation “wherein the polymeric material comprises one or more of PMMA and PC” in lines 1-2 of Claim 2 and lines 2-3 of Claim 7, respectively, requires the claimed device to include at least one of both PMMA and PC materials, or simply at least one of either PMMA or PC materials. The Applicant is respectfully advised that the use of the phrase “at least one of… and…” (or the similar phrase “one or more of… and…”) is a conjunctive list requiring at least one of each of the listed elements; “at least one of… or…” (or the similar phrase “one or more of… or…”) must be used when the intended requirement is to define a structure having at least just one of the cited elements. See Superguide Corp. v DirecTV Enters., Inc., 358 F.3d 870 (69 UPQ2d 1865) (fed. Cir. 2004). The Applicant is further advised that, in comparing the claimed invention with the Prior Art, the Examiner assumed, based on the originally filed description and drawings, Claims 2 and 7 as defining a device including at least one of either PMMA or PC materials.
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected as being indefinite as it is not clear if the recitation “wherein the scattering particles comprise one or more of inorganic particles and silicone particles” in in lines 1-2 of Claim 4 and lines 4-5 of Claim 7, respectively, requires the claimed device to include at least one of both inorganic particles and silicone particles, or simply at least one of either inorganic particles or silicone particles. The Applicant is respectfully advised that the use of the phrase “at least one of… and…” (or the similar phrase “one or more of… and…”) is a conjunctive list requiring at least one of each of the listed elements; “at least one of… or…” (or the similar phrase “one or more of… or…”) must be used when the intended requirement is to define a structure having at least just one of the cited elements. See Superguide Corp. v DirecTV Enters., Inc., 358 F.3d 870 (69 UPQ2d 1865) (fed. Cir. 2004). The Applicant is further advised that, in comparing the claimed invention with the Prior Art, the Examiner assumed, based on the originally filed description and drawings, Claims 4 and 7 as defining a device including at least one of either inorganic particles or silicone particles.
Claim 5 is rejected due to its dependence on indefinite Claim 4.
Regarding claim 13, the use of the word “may have” in the limitation “wherein the curved optical window may have a meandering configuration” in line 2 of the claim renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the curved optical window is required to have a meandering configuration, or if the curved optical window is merely capable of having a meandering configuration, rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner has treated the claimed curved optical window as having a meandering configuration, and so the Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --wherein the curved optical window has a meandering configuration-- for more clarity and to remove the indefinite language.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the axis of the curved optical window" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, it is unclear if the claimed axis is an optical axis of the curved optical window, a longitudinal axis of the curved optical window, or another axis, rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable. For the purpose of examination, the claim has been interpreted as best understood.
Claim 15 is rejected due to its dependence on indefinite Claim 13.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-12, and 14 are allowed.
Claims 2, 4-5, 7, 13, and 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the Prior Art taken as a whole fails to specifically disclose or suggest, in combination, “A light generating system comprising a housing and a light generating device; wherein the housing comprises a light exit window; wherein the light generating device is configured to generate device light, wherein the light exit window comprises a curved optical window, wherein the light exit window is configured to transmit at least part of the device light and to reflect at least part of the device light; wherein the curved optical window has a maximum height (hx), a minimum height (hm), and a radius (r1); wherein 0.7≤hm/hx<1, wherein a thickness (h) of the curved optical window gradually increases from the minimum height (hm) to the maximum height (hx), wherein the minimum height (hm) is at a maximum radius (rx) larger than the radius (r1) and wherein the maximum height (hx) is at a minimum radius (rm) smaller than the radius (r1); wherein the curved optical window comprises a polymeric material; and wherein the curved optical window comprises a curved polymeric diffusor” (emphasis added).
Although light generating systems are known, as evidenced by the Prior Art already of record, no Prior Art was found teaching individually, or suggesting in combination, all the features of Applicant’s invention, in particular the above limitations in combination with the remaining features of the claim, and there would be no motivation, absent the Applicant’s own disclosure, to modify the references in the manner distinctly and specifically called for in the combination as claimed in Claim 1.
Claims 2-15 depend on Claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kaminski et al. (US 2018/0128450), Fogg et al. (US 10,267,478), Yamamoto et al. (US 10,808,907), Adams (US 9,739,441), Kim et al. (US 2013/0107519), An et al. (US 2011/0233568), and Cleaver et al. (US 6,592,238), and Vang et al. (CN 112136001) all disclose lighting systems comprising a housing and at least one light generating device configured to generate device light, the housing comprising a light exit window that comprises a curved optical window configured to transmit at least part of the device light, the curved optical window comprising a polymeric material and a curved polymeric diffusor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM N HARRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-3609. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00AM- 5:00PM EST, Alternate Fridays.
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.
/WILLIAM N HARRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights