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 on 10/06/2025 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 § 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 9 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 9 recites “Table1” as reference according which the values set forth for relative contribution for each of said channel in each mode, but no table (Table1) is provided in description or figures. This confusion render the claim indefinite.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 5-8, 10, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petluri et al. (Pub. No: US 20220001200 A1), hereafter Petluri in view of Krames et al. (Pub. No.: US 20160273717 A1), hereafter Krames.
Regarding claim 1, Petluri teaches a lighting system for emitting emitted light (FIG. 1, semiconductor light emitting devices 100), said system comprising:
multiple independently controlled channels (FIG. 2, control circuit 201 and paragraph [0085], “at least one control circuit 201 a may include a current supply circuit configured to independently apply an on-state drive current to each individual solid state emitter”), each channel representing a point on achromaticity space diagram (paragraph [0096], “The LED(s) in each string and the luminophoric medium in each string together emit an unsaturated light having a color point within a color range in the 1931 CIE chromaticity diagram”), said multiple channels comprising at least;
a blue channel having a blue point on said chromaticity space diagram (FIG. 12 and paragraph [0099], “first color point 1201 produced from a blue channel”);
a cyan channel having a cyan point on said chromaticity space diagram (FIG. 12 and paragraph [0099], “third color point 1203 produced from a short-blue-pumped cyan channel”);
red channel having a red point on said chromaticity space diagram (FIG. 12 and paragraph [0099], “second color point 1202 produced from a red channel”),
wherein said low-blue point is within a 7- step MacAdam ellipse of the Planckian locus (paragraph [0027], “a 7-step MacAdam ellipse around any point on the black body locus having a correlated color temperature”); and a controller FIG. 2, control circuit 201) for independently controlling each of said multiple channels to vary said emitted light paragraph [0085], “at least one control circuit 201 a may include a current supply circuit configured to independently apply an on-state drive current to each individual solid state emitter”)
Petluri does not explicitly disclose a violet-pumped low-blue channel having a low-blue point on said chromaticity space diagram.
Krames teaches a violet-pumped low-blue channel having a low-blue point on said chromaticity space diagram (paragraph [0333], “the presence of a violet pump is of importance since the violet light enables the chromaticity to be near-Planckian at low drive current, even in the absence of blue-cyan light”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Petluri in view of Krames to incorporate a violet-pumped low-blue channel that the the spectrum is modified so that circadian stimulation decreases; at the lowest drive condition there is very little radiation in the range 440 nm to 490 nm (e.g., see curve 1401) and therefore very low stimulation of the circadian system (Krames, paragraph [0330]).
Regarding claim 5, Petluri as modified above further teaches blue light emitted from said blue channel is within regions 301A and 30 D as shown in Fig. 4B (FIG. 4A and paragraph [0102], “suitable blue color ranges can include blue color ranges 301A-F. FIG. 4A depicts a blue color range 301A defined by a line connecting the ccx, ccy color coordinates of the infinity point of the Planckian locus (0.242, 0.24) and (0.12, 0.068)”).
Regarding claim 6, Petluri as modified above further teaches cyan light emitted from said cyan channel is within region 303A shown in Fig. 4B (FIG. 4B and paragraph [0106], “FIG. 4B shows a cyan color range 303A defined by a line connecting the ccx, ccy color coordinates (0.18, 0.55) and (0.27, 0.72), the constant CCT line of 9000K, the Planckian locus between 9000K and 1800K, the constant CCT line of 1800K”).
Regarding claim 7, Petluri as modified above further teaches red light emitted from said red channel is within region 302A shown in Fig. 4B (paragraph [0103], “a red color range 302A defined by the spectral locus between the constant CCT line of 1600K and the line of purples”).
Regarding claim 8, Petluri as modified above further teaches said controller is configured to control said multiple channels to emit said emitted light in at least one of a high fidelity mode, a low EML mode, or a high EML mode (Table 23 and paragraph [0142], “Table 23 shows data for white light color points generated using the first, second, fifth, and sixth LED strings, i.e. the blue, red, yellow, and violet channels, in low-EML mode”).
Regarding claim 10, Petluri as modified above further teaches said emitted light in said high fidelity mode has an Rf of at least 85, or at least 90, or at least 95 (paragraph [0020], “the semiconductor light emitting device is configured to generate the fifth unsaturated light corresponding to a plurality of points along a predefined path with the light generated at each point having light with Rf greater than or equal to about 88, Rg greater than or equal to about 98 and less than or equal to about 104, or both”).
Regarding claim 15, Petluri as modified above further teaches said emitted light in each of the modes has an Rf of at least 80.(paragraph [0020], “the semiconductor light emitting device is configured to generate the fifth unsaturated light corresponding to a plurality of points along a predefined path with the light generated at each point having light with Rf greater than or equal to about 88, Rg greater than or equal to about 98 and less than or equal to about 104, or both”)
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Petluri and Krames in view of Harrison et al. (Pub. No. US 20220334305 A1), hereafter Harrison.
Regarding claim 13, Petluri and Krames teaches limitations of claim 8, but does not disclose said emitted light in said low EML mode has an M/P ratio no greater than 1 below 6000K, or no greater than 0.8 below 4000K, or no greater than 0.6 below 3000K.
Harrison teaches said emitted light in said low EML mode has an M/P ratio no greater than 1 below 6000K, or no greater than 0.8 below 4000K, or no greater than 0.6 below 3000K (paragraphs [0048], [0077], [0078]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Petluri and Krames in view of Harrison to incorporate specific M/P ratio for low EML mode as lower EML values from electric lighting may be beneficial in the evening and at night to reduce unwanted health effects linked to melatonin suppression from certain light (Harrison, paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 14, Petluri and Krames teaches limitations of claim 8, but does not disclose wherein said emitted light in said high EML mode has an M/P ratio no less than 0.8 above 4000K, and no less than 1 above 5000K.
Harrison teaches wherein said emitted light in said high EML mode has an M/P ratio no less than 0.8 above 4000K, and no less than 1 above 5000K (paragraphs [0048], [0077], [0078]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ref. A in view of Ref. B to incorporate specific M/P ratio for low EML mode as higher EML values as the cool mode causes three or more times as much EML than the warm mode (Harrison [paragraph [0047]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 11-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, prior arts whether stand alone or in combination fail to teach or reasonably suggest the system according to Claim 1, comprising “low-blue tight emitted from said low-blue channel is within a low-blue region on a 1931 CIE chromaticity diagram defined by the equi-CCT lines of 1800K and 4500K and the spectral locus”, as required in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Dependent claims 3 & 4 are also objected by virtue of its dependency.
Regarding claim 11, prior arts whether stand alone or in combination fail to teach or reasonably suggest the system according to Claim 8, comprising “said low EML mode has an overall SPD power and a blue light SPD power between 440 and 490 nm, wherein said blue SPD power is no greater than at least 5%, or 3%, or 2%, or 1% of said overall SPD power”, as required in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 12, prior arts whether stand alone or in combination fail to teach or reasonably suggest the system according to Claim 8, comprising “said low EML mode has an overall SPD power and a violet SPD power between 380 and 420 nm, wherein said violet SPD power is at least 2%, or 3%, or 4%, or 5% of said overall SPD power”, as required in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED M KAISER whose telephone number is (571)272-9612. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m.-6 p.m..
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, Abdullah Riyami can be reached at 571-270-3119. 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.
/SYED M KAISER/Examiner, Art Unit 2831 /ABDULLAH A RIYAMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights