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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courcier (U.S. 2017/0089536) in view of Miyairi (U.S. 10,794,558).
Regarding claim 1, Courcier teaches a vehicle lighting device comprising an ADB lighting device unit (see p. 0007) configured to be able to form a plurality of small light distribution patterns in a parallel arrangement at a position that overlaps with a cutoff line of a low-beam light distribution pattern (see fig. 3, output projection of lighting module),
the ADB lighting device unit including a plurality of projection lenses (lenses 8, 9) that is disposed in a state of being arrayed in a right-left direction, and
a plurality of light-emitting elements (light emitting elements 1, 2) that is disposed on a lighting-device rearward side of the projection lenses (see fig. 1), wherein:
the ADB lighting device unit configured to form the respective small light distribution patterns by emitting outgoing lights from the respective light-emitting elements through the respective projection lenses in a lighting-device forward direction (see p. 0107-0110); and
configured such that an outgoing light from a projection lens that is of the projection lenses and that is positioned at one end portion in the right-left direction is emitted in a direction that is inclined to a side of the other end portion in the right-left direction, with respect to a lighting-device front direction (see fig. 6, angled light guides, see p. 0111).
Courcier does not specifically teach that the light distribution patterns overlaps with a cutoff line of a low beam light distribution pattern and that the outgoing light from a projection lens that is of the projection lenses and that is positioned at one end portion in the right-left direction is emitted in a direction that is inclined to a side of the other end portion in the right-left direction.
Miyairi teaches that the light distribution patterns overlaps with a cutoff line of a low beam light distribution pattern (see col. 13 line 46- col. 14 line 7, adb is installed with a lowbeam module and overlaps as shown in figure 17) and that the outgoing light from a projection lens that is of the projection lenses and that is positioned at one end portion in the right-left direction is emitted in a direction that is inclined to a side of the other end portion in the right-left direction (see fig. 4, angled light emitting surfaces create and inclined emission direction).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used the ADB headlight of Courcier in addition to a standard low beam headlight as taught by Miyairi to improve the visibility of the driver and increase the intensity difference between the illuminated and unilluminated regions of the light distribution, see col. 14 of Miyairi.
Regarding claim 2, Courcier and Miyairi teaches that the ADB lighting device unit is configured such that the outgoing light from a projection lens that is of the projection lenses and that is at a position more distant from the other end portion is emitted in a direction that is more greatly inclined to the side of the other end portion (see fig. 4 of Miyairi, see Courcier).
Regarding claim 3, Courcier teaches that the projection lenses are configured by a single lens member (see fig. 1);
a front surface of the lens member is configured by a single curved surface or flat surface (curved surface); and
portions that are on a rear surface of the lens member and that respectively correspond to the projection lenses are configured by convex curved surfaces (see fig. 6, 90 has curved surfaces), and orientations of the convex curved surfaces are set to orientations that are different from each other among the projection lenses (see fig. 6).
Claims 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courcier in view of Miyairi, further in view of Arai (U.S. 2017/0292668).
Regarding claim 4, Courcier and Miyairi teaches further comprising a low-beam lighting device unit (Miyairi, see col. 13-14) configured to form the low-beam light distribution pattern,
Courcier and Miyairi does not specifically teach that the ADB lighting device unit and the low-beam lighting device unit are disposed in a state of being adjacent in the right-left direction (), in a lighting chamber that is provided by a lamp body and a translucent cover; and the ADB lighting device unit is disposed so as to be positioned on a vehicle-width- directional outer side of the low-beam lighting device unit, and an end portion on a vehicle- width-directional inner side is set as the one end portion.
Arai teaches that the ADB lighting device unit and the low-beam lighting device unit are disposed in a state of being adjacent in the right-left direction (see fig. 2, low beam 40a and additional light beam units 40b 40c 40d), in a lighting chamber that is provided by a lamp body and a translucent cover (see fig. 2, transmitting cover 14); and
the ADB lighting device unit is disposed so as to be positioned on a vehicle-width- directional outer side of the low-beam lighting device unit, and an end portion on a vehicle- width-directional inner side is set as the one end portion (see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used the arrangement of the low beam and high beam lighting unit as set forth in Arai in the structure of Courcier to provide a compact headlight housing with accurate aiming for all light source units, see p. 0007, 0018-0019 of Arai.
Regarding claim 5, Arai teaches that the low-beam lighting device unit includes a projection lens (projection lens 32a), a light source (42a) that is disposed on the lighting-device rearward side of a back focus of the projection lens (see fig. 2, behind F1 see p. 0051), a reflector (reflector 44a) that reflects the outgoing light from the light source toward the projection lens, and a shade (shade 46a) that intercepts a part of a reflected light from the reflector in a state of being disposed between the reflector and the projection lens, for forming the cutoff line.
Regarding claim 6, Arai teaches that the ADB lighting device unit is disposed in a state of being displaced to the lighting-device rearward side of the low-beam lighting device unit (see fig. 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kogure (US 12,522,128) teaches an ADB lighting device with the inclined end portions as recited.
Yamamoto (U.S. 10,260,697) teaches an ADB lighting device with an inclined end portion as recited. The Examiner notes that the claims only set forth “a side” is inclined, and does not appear to recite that the other end is also recited.
Aubert (U.S. 11,530,791) teaches an ADB lighting device with inclined side and projection lenses.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J PEERCE whose telephone number is (571)272-6570. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4pm EST.
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, James Greece can be reached on (571) 272-3711. 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.
/Matthew J. Peerce/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights