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 7 July 2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for the first limit assembly on mounting bracket and first limit track on the control box [emphasis added], does not reasonably provide enablement for the first limit assembly on the control box and the first limit track on the mounting bracket [emphasis added]. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The specification describes the opposite arrangement—first limit assembly 13 on mounting bracket 1 and first limit track 21 on control box 2—so the provided disclosure does not reasonably convey possession of the reversed configuration. The Examiner notes that for the purposes of examination, the Examiner would consider the limitation met regardless of whether or not the first limit assembly is on the control box or mounting bracket.
Similarly, claims 4-6 inherit the unsupported reverse arrangement as indicated with respect to claim 3 from which they depend.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for second limit element 1272 on rotation surface 1271 and second limit track 1111 on first support arm 111, does not reasonably provide enablement for a second limit element is provided on the support arm, and a second limit track is provided on the rotation surface. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The specification discloses second limit element 1272 on rotation surface 1271 and second limit track 1111 on first support arm 111, not the reversed arrangement recited in Claim 8.
Similarly, claim 9 inherits the unsupported reverse arrangement as indicated with respect to claim 3 from which they depend.
Claim 13 is included due to its dependency on claim 9.
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.
Claims 10-12 are 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 10 recites the limitation "the first position" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner turned to the specification for clarification and believes it is referring to “the first mounting position” (line 3). For the purposes of examination, “the first position” is understood to be “the first mounting position”.
Claims 11 and 12 is included based on their dependency on claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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)(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 1-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Smith et al. (US 2004/0070984; hereinafter ‘Smith’).
Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses a light stand device, comprising:
a mounting bracket (12; as seen in at least figs. 1-6); and
a control box (14; as seen in at least figs. 1-5);
wherein, the control box (14) is provided with a first driving assembly (at least 104; as seen in at least figs. 4, 5, 9, 10, 12, and 13; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0037]) configured to drive the mounting bracket to rotate relative to the control box, and the first drive assembly is drivingly connected to the mounting bracket (as disclosed in at least paragraphs [0037-0039]);
wherein the mounting bracket (12) comprises a support arm (at least 20; as seen in at least figs. 1-3) and a mounting assembly (at least 72; as seen in at least fig. 4; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0034]) configured to install a luminaire (at least 16; as seen in at least fig. 4); and
wherein a second drive assembly (at least 200; as seen in at least fig. 3) is provided at the support arm (20) configured to drive the mounting assembly (72) to perform pitch rotation (as disclosed in at least paragraphs [0041-0042]), and the second drive assembly (200) is drivingly connected to the mounting assembly (as seen in at least fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, Smith discloses the light stand device according to claim 1, wherein a first limit assembly (at least 88; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0039]; as seen in at least fig. 11) is provided on the mounting bracket (12), and a first limit track (at least 150; as seen in at least fig. 3; as disclosed paragraph [0039]) is provided on the control box (14) corresponding to the first limit assembly (88), and the first limit assembly being movably provided within the first limit track (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 3, Smith discloses the light stand device according to claim 1, wherein, a first limit assembly (at least 150; as seen in at least fig. 3; as disclosed paragraph [0039]) is provided on the control box (14), and a first limit track (at least 88; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0039]; as seen in at least fig. 11) is provided on the mounting bracket (12) corresponding to the first limit assembly (150), and the first limit assembly (150) being movably provided within the first limit track (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood, Smith discloses the light stand device according to claim 3, wherein a first sensor element (58; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0047]) is provided on the mounting bracket (as seen in at least fig. 8), and the control box (14) is provided with a first stroke sensor (at least 102; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0047]) configured to detect positions of the first sensor element (as disclosed in at least paragraph 0047]).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, Smith discloses the light stand device according to claim 3, wherein a first sensor element (at least 102; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0047]) is provided on the control box (14), and the mounting bracket (12) is provided with a first stroke sensor (58; as disclosed in at least paragraph [0047]) configured to detect positions of the first sensor element (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0047]).
Regarding claim 10, Smith discloses the claimed invention as. The light stand device according to claim 1, wherein the mounting assembly (72) comprises a rotating member (202; as seen in at least fig. 3) and a mounting member (72); wherein a first mounting position is provided on the rotating member(202) (as seen in at least fig. 4), and the mounting member (72) is provided with a second mounting position configured to install the luminaire (at 202; as seen in at least fig. 4 wherein a second mounting portion is the narrower portion of the rotating member 202); and wherein the mounting member (72) is movably provided on the first mounting position, and the first position (for 236; in fig. 16) is provided with a first locking assembly configured to lock the mounting member, the first locking assembly corresponding in position to the mounting member (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0042]).
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.
Claims 6-9, 13-15, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith.
Regarding claim 6, as best understood, Smith discloses the claimed invention as indicated above.
Smith does not specifically disclose the language of a moving part or slide slot as disclosed by the specification; however, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize under a broadest reasonable interpretation Smith teaches components that can be interpreted as a moving part and a first limit element; and wherein a slide slot is provided on the moving part, and the first limit element is movably provided at the slide slot, and the first limit element extending through the slide slot into the first limit track when looking at Smith’s range limiting systems (as disclosed in at least paragraphs [0038-0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make the light stand device according to claim 3, with Smith’s first limit assembly (150) comprising a moving part and a first limit element; and wherein a slide slot is provided on the moving part, and the first limit element is movably provided at the slide slot, and the first limit element extending through the slide slot into the first limit track.
One would have been motivated to do so to provide well-known slide slot and associated mating components for a secure alignment.
Regarding claim 7, Smith he light stand device according to claim 1, wherein a rotation surface (formed by the mounting assembly 72) is provided on the mounting assembly (72), the second drive assembly (200) is drivingly connected to the rotation surface (as seen in at least fig. 9); wherein a second limit element (at least 56; as seen in at least fig. 9) is provided on the rotation surface (as seen in fig. 9), and
However, Smith does not expressly teach a second limit track, per se, is provided on the support arm (20) corresponding to the second limit element, the second limit element being movably provided within the second limit track. As noted above, Smith teaches the function of the sliding element without the well-known structure of a defined track.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make a second limit track is provided on Smith’s support arm (20) corresponding to the second limit element, the second limit element being movably provided within the second limit track.
One would have been motivated to do so to provide well-known slide slot and associated mating components for a secure alignment.
Claim 8, as best understood, is rejected as being an obvious variant of claim 7 with a second limit element is provided on the support arm, and a second limit track is provided on the rotation surface corresponding to the second limit element, the second limit element being movably provided within the second limit track [emphasis added].
Regarding claim 9, Smith discloses the claimed invention as indicated above. Smith further discloses a second sensor (154) in addition to the first sensor (58) found in claim 4.
However, Smith may not teach the exact positioning of the second sensor.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have a second sensor element is provided on Smith’s rotation surface, and a second stroke sensor is provided on the support arm configured to detect positions of the second sensor element, the second stroke sensor corresponding in position to the second sensor element.
One would have been motivated to do so to provide a means to detect the location of the light to ensure it is appropriately located.
Regarding claim 13, Smith teaches the claimed invention as indicated above. Smith does not specifically disclose the positioning element assembly as claimed.
One having ordinary skill in the art would understand would recognize the positioning assembly as claimed is, simply, a button.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to including the positioning assembly further comprises a second protrusion, a protrusion base, and a first elastic element; wherein the first elastic element is provided between the second protrusion and the protrusion base, the protrusion base being connected to the release body; wherein a second sliding slot is provided at the third mounting position, and the second protrusion is configured to move within the second sliding slot; and wherein the adapter comprises a release part and a second guide ramp is provided on the release part, and the release part beside the second guide ramp is provided on a stop surface.
One would have been motivated to do so to allow for a secure, yet easily releasable locking button.
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Smith discloses the claimed invention as indicated above.
Smith does not specifically disclose a hanging ring.
One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize the need to have means to mount the light and something like a hanging ring would be old and well-known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a hanging ring is provided on the mounting bracket and/or the control box.
One would have been motivated to do so to provide an easy and simple connection to attach to a truss, wall, or other support structure.
Regarding claims 18 and 19, Smith discloses the light stand device according to claim 1, wherein the control box comprises a housing (110, 113), a display screen (not labelled, clearly seen in at least fig. 1). Smith does not specifically disclose a cover plate.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a cover plate such that both the display screen and the cover plate are provided at the housing, and the cover plate is configured to cover or expose the display screen in response to a movement of the cover plate, wherein a third locking assembly is provided on the control box; and wherein the cover plate is provided with a lug, and the third locking assembly is movably provided on the housing and is configured to lock the lug.
One would have been motivated to do so as a cover plate and subsequent lock/toggle would protect erroneous button pushing and/or damage to the display screen.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fujisawa et al. (US 2017/0074488; hereinafter ‘Fujisawa’).
Regarding claim 16, Smith discloses the claimed invention as indicated above. Smith does not specifically disclose two or more support arms.
Fujisawa teaches two or more support arms and two or more mounting assemblies in a similar lighting fixture.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date make Smith’s mounting bracket comprises two or more support arms and two or more mounting assemblies, as taught by Fujisawa; wherein the two or more support arms comprise a first support arm and a second support arm, the second drive assembly being provided inside the first support arm; wherein the two or more mounting assemblies comprise a first mounting assembly and a second mounting assembly; wherein the second drive assembly is drivingly connected to the first mounting assembly, and the second mounting assembly is rotatably and movably provided on the second support arm; and wherein the luminaire is configured to be between the first mounting assembly and the second mounting assembly.
One would have been motivated to do so as one having ordinary skill in the art would easily recognize a second (or more) arms will reduce bounce and movement in the lighting device for a steadier illumination pattern.
Similarly, regarding claim 17, Smith, as modified by Fujisawa, discloses the claimed invention as indicated above.
Smith, as modified by Fujisawa, does not specifically teach the locking assembly as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a locking assembly for locking or unlocking the second mounting assembly is provided on the second support arm; wherein the locking assembly comprises a toggle lever, a locking pin, a positioning block, and a third elastic element; wherein a locking hole corresponding to the locking pin is provided on the second mounting assembly, one end of the locking pin corresponding to the locking hole; wherein the toggle lever is connected to one side of the locking pin and is movably connected to the support arm, one end of the toggle lever away from the locking pin extending through the support arm and being exposed externally; wherein a positioning lug is provided on the positioning block, the positioning lug being movably in contact with one side of the toggle lever; and wherein the third elastic element is provided on one side of the positioning block away from the positioning lug.
One having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the need for a toggle lever and associated assembly to position.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 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.
Prior art, whether taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose, teach, or render obvious the specifically called for structural combination of a quick-release plate and an adapter; wherein the quick-release plate is movably provided on the first mounting position, and the second mounting position is located on the adapter; wherein the quick-release plate comprises a third mounting position , and the quick-release plate is provided with a second locking assembly configured to lock the adapter; and wherein the adapter is detachably provided at the third mounting position in combination with each and every remaining limitation of the claim.
Claim 12 is included due solely on the dependency of claim 11.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as similar rotational lighting devices are taught.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEAH S MACCHIAROLO whose telephone number is (571)272-2719. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approx 8:30am to 4:30pm.
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, 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.
/LEAH MACCHIAROLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights