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 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, 4-5, 7-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Vincze et al. (WO 2023217913 A2, hereinafter, “Vincze”).
Regarding Claim 1, Vincze teaches an illumination system (lighting system, see figures 1-13b), comprising:
a housing (see housing H, annotated in fig 7a below);
a connection assembly (see connection assembly CA, annotated in fig 7a below) configured to connect the housing (H) to a support structure (pole, not labeled but clearly seen in fig 1);
a lighting element (LED lighting elements, see fig 7a) associated with the housing (H); and
a controller (controller 120 see fig 7a and plurality of sensors disclosed in Page 7, lines 11-29) configured to control operation of the lighting element (LEDs),
wherein the housing (H) includes a portion defining a cavity (see cavity formed by H, not labeled but seen in fig 7a), and
wherein the lighting element (LEDs) includes an optical element (lenses, see fig 7a) configured to direct light from the lighting element (LEDs) to selectively illuminate a target area (area of zebra crossing, see fig 1) of a roadway (traffic surface R, see fig 1).
Annotated figure 7a of Vincze has been reproduced below:
PNG
media_image1.png
341
786
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Vincze teaches wherein the optical element (lens) comprises a lens (see figures 10a-10c).
Regarding Claim 5, Vincze teaches wherein the lens (lens) has a cone angle (see light cone formed by lenses and better seen in fig 9) is configured to direct light from the lighting element (LEDs) to selectively illuminate the target area (see zebra marking on R) without illuminating other portions (areas outside light pattern PP12) of the roadway (R).
Regarding Claim 7, Vincze teaches wherein the lighting element (LEDs) comprises one or more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (see page 18, lines 1-5).
Regarding Claim 8, Vincze teaches further comprising:
an electronic controller (120) coupled to the lighting element (LEDs), wherein the electronic controller (120) is configured to control the lighting element (see page 12, lines 22-35) to illuminate the target area (area of zebra crossing).
Regarding Claim 9, Vincze teaches wherein the electronic controller (120) is configured to control the lighting element (LEDs) to illuminate the target area (area of zebra crossing) based on a pre-programmed schedule (at least nighttime activation via photodetector, which allows automatic activation of light regardless the presence of pedestrians or vehicles, see page 7, lines 15).
Regarding Claim 10, Vincze teaches wherein the controller (120 and sensors) is configured to control the lighting element (LEDs) to illuminate the target area (area of zebra crossing) continuously or in a blinking pattern (flashing light pattern, see page 9, lines 15-21).
Regarding Claim 11, Vincze teaches wherein the controller (120 and sensors) is configured to control the lighting element (LEDs) to illuminate the target area (area of zebra crossing) in a blinking pattern (flashing light pattern, see page 9, lines 15-21).
Regarding Claim 12, Vincze teaches wherein the electronic controller (120) is configured to control the lighting element (LEDs) to illuminate the target area (area of zebra crossing) based on ambient conditions (environment properties, see page 7, lines 20-29).
Regarding Claim 13, Vincze teaches wherein the ambient conditions (environment properties) include at least one selected from a group consisting of a light level (via photodetector, see page 7, line 15), a relative humidity (via humidity sensor, see page 7, line 15), a sound level (via sound capturing means, see page 7, line 15), and a weather condition (via weather sensor, see page 7, line 15).
Regarding Claim 14, Vincze teaches further comprising:
one or more sensors (visible light camera or a thermal camera, a radar such as a Doppler effect radar, a LIDAR, see page 7, lines 11-14) configured to detect vulnerable road users (pedestrian) proximate to the illumination system (lighting system);
wherein the electronic controller (120) is further configured to control the lighting element (LEDs) to illuminate the target area (area of zebra crossing) based on signals received from the one or more sensors (see page 9, lines 5-21).
Regarding Claim 15, Vincze teaches wherein the electronic controller (120) is configured to control the lighting element (LEDs) based on signals received from a user input device (pedestrian pushing push button 200c, see fig 1).
Regarding Claim 16, Vincze teaches wherein the user input device (200c) comprises a crosswalk (zebra crossing, see fig 2) request button (see page 8, lines 10-15).
Regarding Claim 17, Vincze teaches wherein the lighting element (LEDs) configured to emit light of a color matching (warm or cold white, see page 10, lines 20-30) a color of a traffic sign and/or a pavement marking (zebra crossing known for having a white color).
Regarding Claim 19, Vincze teaches wherein the target area (zebra crossing) comprises a pavement marking (see zebra marking on R) on the roadway (R).
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincze et al. (WO 2023217913 A2, hereinafter, “VIncze”) in view of Richilano Vincent (US 3903409 A, hereinafter, “Richilano”).
Regarding Claims 2-3, Vincze does not teach wherein the housing comprises a shroud defining a cavity surrounding at least a portion of the lighting element; and
wherein the shroud includes a rear wall on a distal end of the housing, an overhang portion on a proximal end of the housing, and a bottom wall coupling the rear wall and the overhang portion.
Richilano teaches an illumination system (lamp assembly 60, see figures 1-5) configured to illuminate a target area (streets or parking lots) and including a housing (housing of 60, as expected from a conventional street lamp);
wherein the housing (housing of lamp assembly 60) comprises a shroud (shroud 15, see fig 1) defining a cavity (see cavity formed by 15, better seen in fig 1) surrounding at least a portion of the lighting element (light emitting element of 60); and
wherein the shroud (15) includes a rear wall (upper wall 64, see fig 1) on a distal end of the housing (upper end of housing of 60), an overhang portion (sidewall 62) on a proximal end (upper end of housing of 60) of the housing (housing of 60), and a bottom wall (brackets 68) coupling the rear wall (64) and the overhang portion (62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the shroud as taught by Richilano into the teachings of Vincze for protecting a self-contained conventional illumination system. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to extend the service life of the device.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincze et al. (WO 2023217913 A2, hereinafter, “VIncze”) in view of Lu et al. (US 8331037 B2, hereinafter, “Lu”).
Regarding Claim 6, Vincze does not explicitly teach wherein the cone angle of the lens is between 30 and 45 degrees.
Lu teaches a lens (optical lens 10, see figures 1-12) that provides a cone angle (see cone angle in fig 11);
wherein the cone angle (see cone angle in fig 11) of the lens (10) is between 30 and 45 degrees (as seen in fig 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modify cone angle as taught by Lu into the teachings of Vincze in order to further enhance illumination within the desired range. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification increase illumination over the target area.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincze et al. (WO 2023217913 A2, hereinafter, “VIncze”) in view of Camras et al. (US 20230121234 A1, hereinafter, “Camras”).
Regarding Claim 18, Vincze does not explicitly teach wherein the support structure is a traffic sign pole.
Camras teaches an illumination system (road lighting, see figures 1-4) configured to illuminate a target area (crosswalk 104, see fig 2) and positioned on a support structure (traffic pole, see fig 4):
wherein the support structure (traffic pole, see fig 4) is a traffic sign pole (see fig 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the support structure as taught by Camras into the teachings of Vincze in order to facilitate implementation of the device on existing road supporting structures. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because the particular position of traffic lights nearby crossroads makes illumination of the target area easier.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincze et al. (WO 2023217913 A2, hereinafter, “VIncze”) in view of Camras et al. (US 20230121234 A1, hereinafter, “Camras”) and Richilano Vincent (US 3903409 A, hereinafter, “Richilano”).
Regarding Claim 20, Vincze teaches method of illuminating a pavement marking (illuminating zebra crossing, see figures 1-13b), comprising:
connecting an illumination system (lighting system) to a pole (pole, see figures 1), the illumination system (lighting system) including
a housing (H) a lighting element (LEDs);
positioning the illumination system (lighting system) such that a lens (lens, see fig 7a) of the lighting element (LED, see fig 7a) is oriented towards a roadway (R); and
activating the lighting element (LEDs) to selectively illuminate a target area (area of zebra crossing) on the roadway (R),
wherein the lens (lens) has a cone angle (see angle of illumination, not labeled but seen in fig 1) configured to direct light from the lighting element (LED) to the target area (area of zebra crossing) without illuminating other portions (see other portions of R not illuminated) of the roadway (R).
Vincze does not explicitly teach pole is a traffic sign pole.
Camras teaches an illumination system (road lighting, see figures 1-4) configured to illuminate a target area (crosswalk 104, see fig 2) and positioned on a support structure (traffic pole, see fig 4):
wherein the support structure (traffic pole, see fig 4) is a traffic sign pole (see fig 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the support structure as taught by Camras into the teachings of Vincze in order to facilitate implementation of the device on existing road supporting structures. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because the particular position of traffic lights nearby crossroads makes illumination of the target area easier.
Vincze as modified by Camras does not explicitly teach a shroud housing.
Richilano teaches an illumination system (lamp assembly 60, see figures 1-5) configured to illuminate a target area (streets or parking lots) and including a housing (housing of 60, as expected from a conventional street lamp) and further comprising:
a shroud housing (shroud 15, see fig 1);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the shroud housing as taught by Richilano into the teachings of Vincze as modified by Camras for protecting a self-contained conventional illumination system. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to extend the service life of the device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rampersand Laura. (US 20220005346 A1) discloses an illumination system for illuminating a target area on the road. The system is positioned on a traffic light pole. Light sources are activated via a controller and a plurality of sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR ROJAS CADIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-8007. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-6pm.
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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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.
/OMAR ROJAS CADIMA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875