DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Communication filed on 04/10/2025. In virtue of the communication:
Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application.
The references cited in the Information Disclosure Statement(s) (IDS(s)) filed on 02/06/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR-200414577-Y1.
Regarding claim 1, KR ‘577 discloses an ultraviolet strobe system (e.g., ultraviolet LED lamps 160, Fig. 4) having an infrared strobe system (e.g., infrared LED lamps 180, Fig. 4) (page 3, lines 29-34) comprising:
at least one ultraviolet strobe device (160, Fig. 4, page 5, lines 29-35); and
a controller (100 and 120, Fig. 4, page 3, lines 29-34) connected to the at least one ultraviolet strobe device (160);
wherein the controller causes the at least one ultraviolet strobe device to coordinate with the at least one infrared strobe system to alternate between ultraviolet strobing (flashing of ultraviolet LED lamps 160) and infrared strobing (flashing of infrared LED lamps 180) (Fig. 4 and the claims).
KR ‘577 does not teach this system is used for the aircraft and having a night vision device.
However, these limitations are not of the patentable merits since applying the lighting system on the aircraft and/or with a night vision device would have been held obvious to one having skill in the art as of engineering design choice because the UV strobe lights are widely used on the body of the aircraft to prevent the collision to other aircrafts or objects, especially at the night-time.
Accordingly, modifying or applying the UV strobe system for the aircraft having the night vision device would have been deemed obvious to one having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, KR ‘577 disclosed the ultraviolet strobe system wherein the controller (100 and 120) is further connected to the at least one infrared strobe system .
Regarding claim 3, KR ‘577 disclosed the ultraviolet strobe system wherein the controller (100 and 120) further causes the at least one ultraviolet strobe device (160) to coordinate with the at least one infrared strobe system (180) to alternate between sets or patterns of ultraviolet strobing (flashing of ultraviolet LED lamps 160) and infrared strobing (flashing of infrared LED lamps 180) (Fig. 4 and the claims).
Regarding claim 13, KR ‘577 disclosed the ultraviolet strobe system wherein the at least one ultraviolet strobe device further comprises at least one ultraviolet LED (160, Fig. 4, page 5, lines 29-35).
Regarding claim 14, KR ‘577 disclosed the ultraviolet strobe system wherein the at least one ultraviolet LED (160) being at least one of: an InGaN, AIGaN, or AIInGaN LED (GAN-based UV LEDs, page 5, lines 29-32), and arranged in a single array or in multiple arrays (rays, Fig. 4, page 3, lines 29-34).
Regarding claim 15, KR ‘577 disclosed an ultraviolet strobe system, an infrared strobe system, the ultraviolet strobe system comprising:
at least one ultraviolet strobe device (160, Fig. 4, page 5, lines 29-35); and
a controller (100 and 120, Fig. 4, page 3, lines 29-34) connected to the at least one ultraviolet strobe device (160) and to the infrared strobe system (180) (Fig. 4);
wherein the controller causes the at least one ultraviolet strobe device to coordinate with the at least one infrared strobe system to alternate between ultraviolet strobing (flashing of ultraviolet LED lamps 160) and infrared strobing (flashing of infrared LED lamps 180) (Fig. 4 and the claims).
KR ‘577 does not teach this system is used for the aircraft and having a night vision device.
However, these limitations are not of the patentable merits since applying the lighting system on the aircraft and/or with a night vision device would have been held obvious to one having skill in the art as of engineering design choice because the UV strobe lights are widely used on the body of the aircraft to prevent the collision to other aircrafts or objects, especially at the night-time.
Accordingly, modifying or applying the UV strobe system for the aircraft having the night vision device would have been deemed obvious to one having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, KR ‘577 disclosed the controller (100 and 120) further causes the at least one ultraviolet strobe device (160) to coordinate with the at least one infrared strobe system (180) to alternate between sets or patterns of ultraviolet strobing (flashing of ultraviolet LED lamps 160) and infrared strobing (flashing of infrared LED lamps 180) (Fig. 4 and the claims).
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR-200414577-Y1 in view of SONG (CN 101151531 A).
Regarding claim 10-12, KR ‘577 discloses all of the limitations as claimed except at least one of ground based markings, devices, personnel apparel, and/or equipment provided with markings that phosphor in a wavelength in response to the ultraviolet strobe device.
However, as evidenced by SONG, providing at least one of ground based markings, devices, personnel apparel, and/or equipment provided with markings that phosphor in a wavelength in response to the ultraviolet strobe device (… a signal (e.g., transmitted or reflected light, emitted fluorescence or phosphorescence, etc.) of the detector. lighting source can be of any apparatus known in the art capable of providing electromagnetic radiation, such as visible or near-visible light (e.g., infrared or ultraviolet) range of wavelengths. for example, can be an appropriate illumination source of the invention include, but are not limited to, light emitting diodes (LEDs), flash lamp, page 19) is well known in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to employ the device of KR ’577 with the phosphor markings as taught by SONG in order to provide the visible sign in response to the flashing of the ultraviolet strobe device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-9 and 17-20 are 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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY T VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1832. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alexander H. Taningco can be reached on 571-272-8048. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2800.
/JIMMY T VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
