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 .
This is the first Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-7 are currently pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to, because the recitation “wherein one or more of the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) provided on the underside surface of the lighting strip” lacks antecedent basis. Please amend the claim to say “wherein one or more of the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) is provided on an underside surface of the lighting strip so to direct light downwardly toward the glue board and cause luminescence on the glue board.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seetharam et al. (US 20220295774 A1), hereafter referred to as “Seetharam”.
Regarding claim 1, Seetharam discloses a flying insect trap (figs. 6-9; abstract) comprising:
a housing (104; fig. 9) having at least one window (paragraph [0067]) configured to allow ingress of flying insects (paragraph [0067]);
a glue board (62, 64, 66; fig. 9; see also figs. 6A-7G) positioned within the housing and visible through the window (fig. 9), the glue board comprising:
a substrate (62);
an adhesive layer (66) applied to the substrate (paragraphs [0050]-[0051]); and
fluorescent photoluminescent pigment (66; paragraphs [0052]-[0055]) incorporated within the adhesive layer (paragraphs [0052]-[0055]); and
a light source (102) positioned to illuminate the glue board (fig. 9 and paragraph [0066]) and configured to emit light that activates the fluorescent photoluminescent pigment to cause the glue board to emit visible light substantially simultaneously with illumination by the light source (paragraphs [0052] and [0062]), thereby attracting flying insects to the adhesive layer (paragraphs [0052] and [0062]).
Regarding claim 2, Seetharam discloses the flying insect trap of claim 1, and further discloses that the fluorescent photoluminescent pigment (66) comprises fluorescent organic pigments (paragraph [0054], e.g., teaching optical brightening agents).
Regarding claim 3, Seetharam discloses the flying insect trap of claim 1, and further discloses that the fluorescent photoluminescent pigment (66) is directly mixed into the adhesive layer (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 4, Seetharam discloses the flying insect trap of claim 1, and further discloses that the light source comprises a plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (120; paragraph [0066]).
Regarding claim 6, Seetharam discloses the flying insect trap of claim 4, and further discloses that the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (120) are configured to emit light in a wavelength range of 300-700 nanometers (paragraph [0066]).
Regarding claim 7, Seetharam discloses the flying insect trap of claim 6, and further discloses that one or more of the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) provided on the underside surface of the lighting strip (102; fig. 9) are configured to direct light downwardly toward the glue board and cause luminescence of the glue board (paragraph [0066]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seetharam as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Preuschl (US 20140027800 A1), hereafter referred to as “Preuschl”.
Regarding claim 5, Seetharam teaches the flying insect trap of claim 4, and further teaches wherein the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) are provided on a lighting strip (102) having an upper surface and an underside surface (fig. 9), and whereby one or more of the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) are provided on the underside surface of the lighting strip (fig. 9 and paragraph [0066]), but does not explicitly teach that one or more of the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) are provided on the upper surface of the lighting strip.
Preuschl teaches a lighting strip with one or more of a plurality of light emitting diodes (13) provided on both the upper surface and underside surface of the lighting strip (paragraphs [0026] and [0030]; see also fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Seetharam to include that one or more of the plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) are provided on the upper surface of the lighting strip, as taught by Preushl, in order to increase the attracting effect of the trap.
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure. The references have many of the elements in the applicant’s disclosure and claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessica Byun whose telephone number is (571) 272-3212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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. Agendas may be sent to HaeRie.Byun@uspto.gov.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Poon can be reached on (571) 272-6891. 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.
/H.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646