DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 5/27/2026 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 3-4 and 10-11 have been cancelled, claims 1 and 8 have been amended, thus currently claims 1-2, 5-9 and 12-20 are pending.
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.
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 1-2 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Studeny et al. (US 20220024374 A1, hereinafter, “Studeny”, cited by the applicant in IDS filed on 6/5/2026) in view of Zhu et al. (CN 208886659 U, hereinafter, “Zhu”, cited by the applicant in IDS filed on 6/5/2026).
Regarding claim 1, Studeny teaches a vehicle lighting fixture (emblem arrangement 1, see figures 1-5a), comprising:
a light-emitting body (luminous means 41, see fig 3);
an inner lens (light guide 30, see fig 3) that emits light from the light-emitting body (41) to at least a front side in a vehicle front-rear direction (along midaxis M, see fig 4);
a light-transmitting member (cover glass 10, see fig 3) that is disposed at a position away (spaced by air gap S, better seen in fig 5a) from the inner lens (30) on the front side (front side of 30), and which is formed with a light-blocking pattern (screen-printed layer 20b of layer structure 20, see fig 5a) that blocks a portion (see ¶ 73-75) of light emitted from the inner lens (30); and
an inner panel (emblem support part 50, see fig 4) that covers the light-emitting body (41 from behind) and a portion of a side surface (see side surface 30 from behind) of the inner lens (30) from an outer peripheral side (peripheral side of 30).
Studeny does not explicitly teach wherein the inner lens has a shape extending in the vehicle front-rear direction, and has an end surface disposed at an end portion on the front side in the vehicle front-rear direction and the side surface extending from the end surface toward a back side, and wherein a portion of the inner lens including the end surface and a part of the side surface connected to the end surface protrudes from the inner panel toward the front side, and the inner lens emits light from the end surface and the part of the side surface.
Zhu teaches a vehicle lighting fixture (Logo lamp capable of lighting, see figures 1-5), having a light-emitting body (LED light source 8), an inner lens (inner lampshade 4), a light-transmitting member (outer lampshade 5) and an inner panel (shell 1, see fig 5) that covers the light-emitting body (8) and a portion of a side surface (see peripheral surface PS of 4, see fig 2 below) of the inner lens (4) from an outer peripheral side (peripheral side of 4);
wherein the inner lens (4) has a shape extending (see shape of 4 extending from 1 towards 5, better seen in fig 2) in the vehicle front-rear direction (from left to right of fig 2), and has an end surface (see end surface of 4 ES, as seen in figure 2 below) disposed at an end portion (see outer end portion of 4 with respect to 8) on the front side (front side of 1) in the vehicle front-rear direction (from left to right of fig 2) and the side surface (PS) extending from the end surface (ES) toward a back side (concave side of 4), and wherein a portion (portion of 4) of the inner lens (4) including the end surface (ES) and a part of the side surface (part of PS) connected to the end surface (ES) protrudes from the inner panel (1) toward the front side (as clearly seen in fig 2), and the inner lens (4) emits light from the end surface (ES) and the part of the side surface (PS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the inner panel as taught by Zhu into the teachings of Studeny in order to provide peripheral protection to the light emitting body and portions of the inner lens. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to expand the service life of the device.
Annotated figure 2 of Zhu has been reproduced below:
PNG
media_image1.png
610
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Studeny teaches wherein the light-blocking pattern (20b of 20) is formed on a surface (rear surface of 10) of the light-transmitting member (10) that faces the inner lens (30).
Regarding claim 5, Studeny teaches wherein the light-transmitting member (10) has the light-blocking pattern (20b of 20) disposed on an inner side (side of 30) of the inner lens (30) in a front view (as the pattern, as seen from the front, is disposed on all the surfaces below, including inner side of the inner lens).
Regarding claim 6, Studeny teaches further comprising a housing (motor vehicle K, as 50 is attached to K and 10, see ¶ 70) that accommodates the light-emitting body (41) and the inner lens (30), wherein the light-transmitting member (10) is an outer lens (as seen in fig 4) that forms a lamp chamber (space between K and 10) together with the housing (K and 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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.
Regarding claim 7, although Studeny and Zhu teach the Vehicle light fixture, as described in claim 1 above, the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach further comprising a light source, and a rod-shaped light-guiding body having an opposing surface that faces the light-emitting body, and which guides light from the light source and emits the light from the opposing surface to the light-emitting body, while also emitting the light from the light source from a side surface toward another optical member that is different from the light-emitting body before the light is guided to the opposing surface, wherein the light-emitting body emits light due to light emitted from the rod-shaped light- guiding body.
Claims 8-9 and 12-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With regard to claim 8, while lighting fixture units comprising: an annular light-guiding body formed in an annular shape, which is formed with incident surfaces at single locations at positions on each of a left and right side and offset above and below a central axis, and facing toward an outer side in a radial direction in a left- right direction, and which guides light that enters from the incident surfaces and emits the light on a front side in a vehicle front-rear direction; an inner lens disposed on a front side of the annular light-guiding body, which is formed in an annular shape along a shape of the annular light-guiding body, and which emits the light emitted from the annular light-guiding body toward a front side: a holding portion that holds the annular light-guiding body and the inner lens with spacing in the vehicle front-rear direction, are old and well known in the illumination art (as evidenced by the Prior Art already made of record), no prior art was found teaching:
The light fixture unit, as disclosed in claim 8 above, further comprising a light-blocking portion disposed from an inner peripheral portion of the annular light- guiding body to an inner peripheral portion of the inner lens.
Claims 9 and 12-20 are allowed for being dependent on the allowed claim 8.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2 and 5-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 6/5/2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 OMAR ROJAS CADIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-8007. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-6pm.
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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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.
/OMAR ROJAS CADIMA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights