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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 5, line 3, “...of about 3,5000 kelvin to about 5,000 kelvin...,” should read: --...of 3,500 kelvin 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 3, 5-7, and 16-17 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 claim 3, the limitation recites: “...the at least one source of colored light is configured to produce colored light at a wavelength in a range of from about 600nm to 650nm...,” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is a relative term of degree, see MPEP 2173.05(b).I. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not describe any range of values that qualify as being “about” 600nm. Thus, the claim is indefinite as the scope defined thereby cannot be reasonably ascertained by one skilled in the art. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...the at least one source of colored light is configured to produce colored light at a wavelength in a range of from
Regarding claim 5, the limitation recites: “...the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of about 3,5000 kelvin to about 5,000 kelvin...,” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is a relative term of degree. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not describe any range of values that qualify as being “about” 3,5000 kelvin or “about” 5,000 kelvin. Thus, the claim is indefinite as the scope defined thereby cannot be reasonably ascertained by one skilled in the art. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to
Regarding claim 6, the limitation recites: “...the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by about 1,000 kelvin to about 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light...,” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is a relative term of degree. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not describe any range of values that qualify as being “about” 1,000 kelvin or “about” 2,000 kelvin. Thus, the claim is indefinite as the scope defined thereby cannot be reasonably ascertained by one skilled in the art. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by
Regarding claim 7, the limitation recites: “...the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by about 1,000 kelvin to about 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light...,” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is a relative term of degree. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not describe any range of values that qualify as being “about” 1,000 kelvin or “about” 2,000 kelvin. Thus, the claim is indefinite as the scope defined thereby cannot be reasonably ascertained by one skilled in the art. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by
Regarding claim 16, the limitation recites: “...wherein the at least one source of white light produces light at about 1,500 lumen to about 6,000 lumen...,” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is a relative term of degree. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not describe any range of values that qualify as being “about” 1,500 lumen or “about” 6,000 lumen. Thus, the claim is indefinite as the scope defined thereby cannot be reasonably ascertained by one skilled in the art. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...wherein the at least one source of white light produces light at lumen to
Regarding claim 17, the limitation recites: “...the at least one source of white light produces light at about 5,000 lumen...,” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is a relative term of degree. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not describe any range of values that qualify as being “about” 5,000 lumen. Thus, the claim is indefinite as the scope defined thereby cannot be reasonably ascertained by one skilled in the art. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: --...the at least one source of white light produces light at
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.
Claim Rejections - 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 8-15, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Morgan et al. (US 2005/0174473 A1, herein referred to as: Morgan).
Regarding claim 1, Morgan discloses (Figs. 1-111) a light device (e.g. Figs. 3 and 9) comprising: at least one source of white light (300, e.g. paragraphs [0188]-[0202]); and at least one source of colored light (another 300, e.g. paragraphs [0188]-[0202]); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has an altered color temperature value compared to the light produced by only the at least one source of white light (paragraphs [0189] and [0207]-[0210]).
Regarding claim 2, Morgan discloses the at least one source of colored light (300) is configured to produce colored light in a color selected from the group consisting of red, amber, yellow, orange, and combinations thereof (paragraphs [0188]-[0200]).
Regarding claim 3, as is best understood, Morgan discloses the at least one source of colored light is configured to produce colored light at a wavelength in a range of from 600nm to 650nm (as described in paragraphs [0188]-[0200], i.e. orange and red LEDs are well known to produce a wavelength band in the claimed range, with orange comprising approximately 585nm-620nm and red comprising approximately 620nm-750nm).
Regarding claim 4, Morgan discloses the at least one source of colored light (300) comprises at least two sources of colored light (as shown in Fig. 3, and as described in paragraphs [0188]-[0210]), wherein the at least two sources of colored light (300) are each configured to produce colored light in a color selected from the group consisting of red, amber, yellow, orange, and combinations thereof (as shown in Fig. 3 and as described in paragraphs [0188]-[0210], one or more white or color light source can be used to produce the desired color temperature or color output as desired for the suited application).
Regarding claim 8, Morgan discloses at least one input component (3500), the input component configured to switch between different modes of the light device (e.g. as described in paragraph [0329]).
Regarding claim 9, Morgan discloses the at least one input component (3500) is configured to switch between a first mode comprising white light only and a second mode comprising a combination of white light and colored light (as described in paragraph [0329], i.e. “…a single fixture can have narrow bandwidth light sources for multicolor light applications and then can change to a current and PWM control mode to get broad spectra to make good white light or non-white light with broader spectrum color characteristics…” implies the device of Morgan can produce both white light only, and can produce colored light only or mixed light formed by the “non-white light with broader spectrum color characteristics”).
Regarding claim 10, Morgan discloses the at least one input component (3500) is configured to switch between the first mode, the second mode, and a third mode comprising colored light only (as described in paragraph [0329], i.e. “…a single fixture can have narrow bandwidth light sources for multicolor light applications and then can change to a current and PWM control mode to get broad spectra to make good white light or non-white light with broader spectrum color characteristics…” implies the device of Morgan can produce both white light only, and can produce colored light only or mixed light formed by the “non-white light with broader spectrum color characteristics”).
Regarding claim 11, Morgan discloses the at least one input component (3500) is further configured to adjust at least one of a brightness or a color temperature of at least one of the at least one white light source or the at least one colored light source (as described in paragraph [0329], i.e. as the light sources are fixed after the device is produced, in order to achieve the modes of operation or spectral productions described in paragraph [0329], the device must be configured to adjust at least one of a brightness or a color temperature of at least one of the at least one white light source or the at least one colored light source).
Regarding claim 12, Morgan discloses at least one of a brightness or a color temperature of the light produced by the at least one source of white light is fixed (as described in paragraph [0361], i.e. a mode can be designated as a fixed color mode, and the modes can include both white and non-white illumination modes. Thus, one can at least have a fixed color mode for white light or non-white light, in which the color temperature of the light produced by the at least one source of white light is a fixed for that mode. Additionally, the claim does not specify the particular manner in which the brightness or intensity is fixed).
Regarding claim 13, Morgan discloses at least one of a brightness or a color temperature of the light produced by the at least one source of colored light is a fixed (as described in paragraph [0361]).
Regarding claim 14, Morgan discloses at least one of a brightness or a color temperature of the light produced by the at least one source of white light is variable (as described in paragraph [0329]).
Regarding claim 15, Morgan discloses at least one of a brightness or a color temperature produced by the at least one source of colored light is variable (described in paragraph [0329]).
Regarding claim 18, Morgan discloses (Fig. 9, paragraph [0245]) the light device is configured for underwater use (as described in paragraph [0245]).
Regarding claim 19, Morgan discloses (Fig. 9, paragraph [0245]) the light device is configured to couple with a camera (Figs. 56-81, paragraph [0503], i.e. the lighting devices are configured as camera flash units, and are thus configured to couple to a camera. In addition, various other embodiments satisfy the claimed limitation as the manner of coupling is not particularly recited, e.g. structurally, electrically, etc.).
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 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan, in view of KR 100545331 B1 (herein referred to as: ‘5331).
Regarding claim 5-7, as are best understood, Morgan does not explicitly teach that the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to 5,000 kelvin (as recited in claim 5); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 6); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 7).
‘5331 teaches or suggests (Figs. 1-13) the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to 5,000 kelvin (both the first and second exemplary programs, using both orange and yellow light [for the second program] or orange light [for the first program], to reduce the color temperature of the white 5000K LED to 4000K); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as shown in both exemplary programs to lower 1000K, as well as in various other examples of the reference, for example: “…Here, when only the white LED is turned on, white light having a color temperature of 5000 ° K is obtained, but color rendering is poor. By the way, when three to six orange LEDs are turned on, the color rendering property is improved and the color temperature is lowered to 3000 to 2500 ° K….,” wherein lowering the color temperature from 5000K to 3000K results in a 2000K differential); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as shown in both exemplary programs to lower 1000K, as well as in various other examples of the reference, for example: “…Here, when only the white LED is turned on, white light having a color temperature of 5000 ° K is obtained, but color rendering is poor. By the way, when three to six orange LEDs are turned on, the color rendering property is improved and the color temperature is lowered to 3000 to 2500 ° K….,” wherein lowering the color temperature from 5000K to 3000K results in a 2000K differential).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Morgan and incorporated the teachings of the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to 5,000 kelvin (as recited in claim 5); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 6); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 7), such as taught or suggested by ‘5331, in order to improve, or otherwise increase, the marketability and/or performance of the device (i.e. by providing a mode by which the device can achieve color temperature adjustments in various ranges, thereby increasing the variety of applications in which the device can be used, or aesthetic to which the device can provide).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan, in view of Hall et al. (US 2014/0140058 A1, herein referred to as: Hall).
Regarding claims 5-7, as are best understood, Morgan does not explicitly teach that the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to 5,000 kelvin (as recited in claim 5); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 6); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 7).
Hall teaches or suggests (Figs. 1-5) the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to 5,000 kelvin (as described in paragraph [0036]); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as described in paragraphs [0022] and [0036]); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as described in paragraphs [0022] and [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Morgan and incorporated the teachings of the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature of 3,500 kelvin to 5,000 kelvin (as recited in claim 5); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is altered by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 6); wherein the light produced by the combination of the at least one source of white light and the at least one source of colored light has a color temperature value that is decreased by 1,000 kelvin to 2,000 kelvin compared to the light produced only by the at least one source of white light (as recited in claim 7), such as taught or suggested by Hall, in order to improve, or otherwise increase, the marketability and/or performance of the device (i.e. by providing a mode by which the device can achieve color temperature adjustments in various ranges, thereby increasing the variety of applications in which the device can be used, or aesthetic to which the device can provide).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan, in view of Stoltz (US 2012/0212943 A1).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, as are best understood, while Morgan teaches or suggests that the number of LEDs can be selected as desired to produced a given lumen output (paragraph [0210]), Morgan does not explicitly teach that the at least one source of white light produces light at 1,500 lumen to 6,000 lumen (as recited in claim 16); wherein the at least one source of white light produces light at 5,000 lumen (as recited in claim 17).
Stoltz teaches or suggests (paragraph [0038]) the at least one source (13) of white light produces light at 1,500 lumen to 6,000 lumen (as described in paragraph [0038]); wherein the at least one source of white light produces light at 5,000 lumen (as described in paragraph [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Morgan and incorporated the teachings of the at least one source of white light produces light at 1,500 lumen to 6,000 lumen (as recited in claim 16); wherein the at least one source of white light produces light at 5,000 lumen (as recited in claim 17), such as taught or suggested by Stoltz, in order to produce the desired luminous output from the white light source as suited for the given application.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan, in view of Gantz et al. (US 2014/0055978 A1, herein referred to as: Gantz).
Regarding claim 20, Morgan does not explicitly teach that the light device is configured to couple to a case designed to fit a smart device.
Gantz teaches or suggests (Fig. 4) a light device is configured to couple to a case designed to fit a smart device (as shown in Fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Morgan and incorporated the teachings of the light device is configured to couple to a case designed to fit a smart device, such as taught or suggested by Gantz, in order to improve, or otherwise increase, the utility of the device (i.e. by providing a configuration by which the device can be utilized products such as cases for smart devices).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: please see US 2014/0140058 A1 to Hall, pertinent to the features of claims 1-8 and 12-15; and US 2011/0273107 A1 to Hsia and US 2006/0022214 A1 to Morgan, pertinent to the various color and color temperature control features recited in claims 1-20.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Colin J Cattanach whose telephone number is (571)270-5203. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 AM - 6:30 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 on (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.
/COLIN J CATTANACH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875