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 6/25/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Preliminary Amendment
Preliminary amendment of disclosure filed on 6/25/2025 has been entered. Accordingly, the amended Abstract and Claims are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because: Fig. 5a the reference sign "11" should be replaced by "10" and the line without any reference sign and linking to the bottom emitter should be supplemented by reference sign "11". Fig. 7 comprises Italian text. Figs. 1-8 all utilize greyscale which renders some of the details difficult to discern and has resulted in poor black and white image quality. 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
Claim 1 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: “characterized in that” should read --wherein-- to conform to US practice. Claim 11 last line should be corrected to read, “according to
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 9 and 10 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.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, the phrase "envisaged" renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). It is noted the term “envisage” is generally defined as “to view or regard in a certain way” or “to have a mental picture of especially in advance of realization”. Such a term suggests an optional nature to the language which follows the term, such being how this claims are interpreted as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fan (CN 104633507 A, such provided for as cited in Applicant’s previously submitted IDS).
In regards to claim 1, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, optoelectronic device of the LED (light emitting diode) type, comprising a light source (3) comprising a flat emission surface (10) , which light source (3) is contained within an outer casing (2), configured to allow the passage of at least part of a beam of light generated by the light source (3), there being at least one power cable (9) of said light source (3) connected to an electrical power source (via 8 and 9), characterized in that said light source (3) is directly connected to said power cable (9), said outer casing (2) identifying a transmission channel (5) of said light beam, said transmission channel (5) and said light source (3) being configured to identify a light beam scattering point (11) positioned at an end of said transmission channel (5), said scattering point (11) and said light source (3) being spaced apart (see Figs. 1 and 7).
In regards to claim 2, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, the outer casing (2) consists of a tubular element (at exterior of 5), arranged with its own longitudinal axis perpendicularly with respect to said flat emission surface (10), the scattering point (11) being positioned at the end of said tubular element (see Fig. 7).
In regards to claim 3, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, said light source (3) is positioned at the end of the tubular element opposite the scattering point (11, see Figs. 1 and 7).
In regards to claim 4, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, said outer casing (2) consists, at least in part, of transparent material, said outer casing having an opaque zone (22) at the scattering point (11, Par. [0019], also noting as 11 scatters the light, there must be some portions where light does not exit following the laws of optics, such interpreted to meet such a “zone”. If an opaque material separate from the transparent material of which the casing consists at least in part is meant by applicant, such is not yet claimed).
In regards to claim 5, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, said transparent material part consists of a homogeneous material of defined and constant composition (material of 2 and 5, (Par. [0006, 0014]).
In regards to claim 6, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, said light source (3) comprises one or more emitters (11, 12, 13) , there being one or more barrier elements (14) , which barrier elements (14) are configured so as to intercept the transmission of the rays belonging to the light beam which scatter within the transmission channel (5) with an inclination below a certain threshold value with respect to the flat emission surface (10).
In regards to claim 7, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, said barrier elements (14) have reflective walls to reflect, in the direction of the scattering point (11), the rays belonging to the light beam which scatter within the transmission channel (5) with an inclination below a certain threshold value with respect to the flat emission surface (10).
In regards to claim 8, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, said power cable (9) comprises at least two flat power conductors (8) coated by an outer sheath (portions of 2), which outer sheath identifies a housing seat for each conductor (see Figs. 1 and 3).
In regards to claim 9, as best understood, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, the following steps are envisaged: - welding the power cable to the light source (Par. [0041]), so as to identify a plane on which the power cable and the light source lie (see Fig. 4), - injection moulding the outer casing around the light source (Par. [0054]), the welding step and the injection moulding step being carried out automatically (by machine).
In regards to claim 10, as best understood, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, coating the at least two conductors with an outer sheath (via 2, Par. [0042]), so as to identify at least two corresponding housing seats (see Figs. 1, 7, 12), a step of twisting said housing seats on themselves being subsequently envisaged (such considered optional, however it is noted that twisted wires are notoriously well known).
In regards to claim 11, Fan discloses in Figures 1-7, lighting device comprising a plurality of lighting elements (plurality of 3) electrically connected in series to each other (illustrated in Fig. 1), characterized in that said lighting elements consist of an optoelectronic device of the LED (light emitting diode) type made according to Claim 1 (see rejection of Claim 1 above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please review the cited references found on the attached PTO-892, too many to list here, which teach either alone or in combination LED devices with light source, casing, power cable, transmission channel, scattering point, and the details thereof, along with the method steps of welding and injection molding, similar to that which is currently claimed above and that which is disclosed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER K GARLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3599. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM.
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.
/ALEXANDER K GARLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights