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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “raised edge” must be shown or referred to or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: LIGHTING HOUSING WITH A COVER AND PAN ATTACHED VIA DEFORMABLE TABS.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the protruding member is not in the written specification.
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.
Claim 1 is 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the internal cavity and its relationship to the cover. It is ambiguous as to whether the rim or other part of the cover is defining the aperture.
Claims 2-12 are rejected for the dependence on Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 applicant is respectfully advised that in examining a pending application, the claims are interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably convey. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 70 USPQ2d. 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2004). MPEP § 2111.01.
Claims 1-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibson (U.S. Patent No. 7,824,080) in view of Chan (U.S. Patent No. 5,457,617).
Regarding Claim 1, Gibson discloses in Figures 1-3, a lighting housing 100, comprising: a cover 112 116 including a rim 102b defining an aperture 114 to an internal cavity (Col 6, lines , wherein a portion of the rim includes a raised edge; 102b and a pan 102, separable from the cover 112, 116 and including a perimeter wall configured to surround and continuously contact the rim such that the raised edge (shown not labelled on 116 that extends down) is parallel to the perimeter wall when the cover 112, 116 and the pan 102 are engaged.
Regarding Claims 1, 7 and 9, Gibson does not disclose an inner face of the perimeter wall 102b includes an integrally formed tab configured to engage the raised edge by extending inwardly relative to the cover, and wherein the tab is structured such that applying pressure to the tab causes the tab to resiliently deform and disengage from the raised edge and a second portion of the rim includes a recess , and wherein the perimeter wall further includes a protruding member configured to occupy the recess when the tab is engaged with the raised edge, wherein the protruding member occupying the recess restricts movement of the cover relative to the pan Regarding Claim 9 and the inner face of the perimeter wall further includes an integrally formed second tab configured to engage the raised edge by extending inwardly relative to the cover, wherein the second tab is structured such that applying pressure to the second tab resiliently deforms the second tab to disengage from the raised edge, and wherein the second tab is positioned on an opposite end of the cover such that it extends toward the tab.
Chan discloses in Figure 1, an integrally formed first and second tab 45 (each clip 47 has retaining tab 45 Col 4, lines 1-5) configured to engage a raised edge of a cover or can 37 or housing for a light source by extending inwardly relative to the cover 37, at a first and second portion of the rim and wherein the tab 45 is structured such that applying pressure to the tab 45 causes the tab to resiliently deform and disengage from the raised edge (Col 4, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a tab to the perimeter wall 102b of what is seen to be a pan. All the claimed elements in Gibson and Chan were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the integrally formed tab as claimed with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded the predictable result providing a detachable connection the pan or plaster frame 102 configuration for removing the pan or to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claims 2-3 and 5, Gibson discloses in Figure 1, a second aperture 114 but does not disclose the lighting housing of claim 1, further comprising: a door pivotably coupled to the cover 112 and spanning the second aperture 114, wherein the door is configured to provide access to the internal cavity wherein the door includes a snap mechanism configured to releasably latch the door to the cover.
Chan discloses a snap mechanism to releasably latch a door 27 that is pivotally coupled to wiring housing compartment to allow access to a wiring junction box. This allows easy access to the wiring to replace or access the connections (Col 3, lines 45-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply a door to a compartment to allow access to a wiring compartment of the cover 112, 116.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate a latch abler pivotal door to the junction box to allow easy access to the junction box compartment.
Regarding Claim 4, Gibson discloses in Figures 1-3, the lighting housing of claim 1, further comprising: a wiring wall configured to contact a portion of an inner face of the cover 112 to divide the internal cavity into a wiring chamber 310 and a lighting element chamber (Col 6, lines 25-35).
Regarding Claim 6, Gibson as modified by Chan inherently discloses in Figures 1-3, the lighting housing of claim 1, wherein a seam between the cover 112, 116 and the pan prevents movement of air when the tab is engaged with the raised edge.
Regarding Claim 8, Gibson discloses the lighting housing of claim 1, wherein the aperture is configured to accommodate a lighting element (lamp assembly 108) therein (Col 5, lines 50-60).
Regarding Claim 12, Gibson does not explicitly disclose the lighting housing of claim 1, wherein a height of the perimeter wall 102b is greater than a height of the raised edge.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to change the height of the walls 102 so that it is greater than the height of the raised edge (of the double panel 116) in order to envelop the edge of the cover to better conceal any seams, since it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984),
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wronski (U.S. Patent No. 7,896,529) discloses in a light housing with cover and pan with aperture and wiring chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J MAY whose telephone number is (571)272-5919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-3:30pm.
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.
/ROBERT J MAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875