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 § 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.
Claims 6 and 8 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.
The term “acceptable surface luminance and sufficient vertical illuminance” in claim 6 and “acceptable luminance for illumination” in claim 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “acceptable” and “sufficient” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
As such, the examiner is interpreting the limitation of claim 6 as “achieve a surface luminance and a vertical illuminance at an eye level of the occupant to enhance circadian entrainment” and the limitations of claim 8 as “achieve a luminance for illumination”.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamats (US 4,933,822).
Claim 1: Nakamats discloses a task light (1) for illuminating a work surface (surface of under 27, fig. 5) of a work station, the task light comprising: a lighting element (1, fig. 5) configured to emit light output (2, fig. 5) in a direction toward the work surface (direction to 27, fig. 5);a redirection member (3, fig. 5) maneuverable between a stowed position (position in fig. 5) and a use position (position in fig. 3);wherein, when the redirection member (3) is in the use position (see fig. 3) a portion of the light output is directed toward a face of an occupant of the work station (face of person in fig. 3); and wherein, when the redirection member (3) is in the stowed position (see fig. 5), said portion of light is not directed toward the face of said occupant (light directed to book 27, fig. 5).
Claim 6: As best understood, Nakamats discloses the redirection member (3) comprises a reflective panel (3), wherein a size and/or a finish of the panel (mirror finish of 3) are configured to achieve a surface luminance and a vertical illuminance (see fig. 5) at an eye level of the occupant to enhance circadian entrainment (see fig. 5).
Claim 8: As best understood, Nakamats discloses the redirection member (3) comprises a reflective panel (3), and wherein a size and a finish of the panel are configured to achieve a luminance for illumination of the occupant during a video conference (see fig. 5).
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.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamats (US 4,933,822) in view of Luo (US 2017/0067617).
Claim 2: Nakamats teaches the redirection member (3) comprises a reflective panel (3) hingeably affixed to the task light (1) and pivotably moveable (pivoting about pivots 23, see Col. 5 line 68 – Col. 6 lines 1-5) from the stowed position (position in fig. 5) to the use position (position in fig. 3).
However, Nakamats fails to teach the reflective panel is hingeably affixed to the task light.
Luo teaches a reflective panel (panel of fig. 2) hingeably affixed to the light (5, fig. 1).
Therefore, in view of Luo, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reflective panel of Nakamats to include a hinge where the reflective panel is hingeably affixed to the task light, in order to adjust the illumination range of the lamp.
Claim 3: Nakamats teaches the redirection member (3, fig. 1) includes a first portion (22, fig. 1) affixed to the task light (1, fig. 1) and a second portion (23, fig. 1) rotatably connected to the first portion (22).
However, Nakamats fails to teach the first portion hingeably affixed to the task light and the second portion rotatably connected to the first portion such that the second portion is foldable atop the first portion in the stowed position and the second portion is rotatable into a position coplanar to the first portion to form the use position.
Luo teaches a redirection member (see fig. 2) includes a first portion (6.1, fig. 1) hingeably affixed to the task light (5, fig. 1) and a second portion (7.4, fig. 1) rotatably (radial rotation, see para [0038]) connected to the first portion (6.1) such that the second portion is foldable atop the first portion in the stowed position (see fig. 9B) and the second portion is rotatable into a position coplanar to the first portion to form the use position (see fig. 9A).
Therefore, in view of Luo, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reflective panel of NakaMats to include a hinge where a first portion is hingeably affixed to the task light and a second portion is rotatably connected to the first portion such that the second portion is foldable atop the first portion in the stowed position and the second portion is rotatable into a position coplanar to the first portion to form the use position, in order to adjust the illumination range of the lamp.
Claim(s) 4 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamats (US 4,933,822) in view of Maresh (US 9,644,819).
Claim 4: Nakamats teaches the redirection member comprises a reflective panel (3).
However, Nakamats fails to teach that the reflective panel is slidably disposed on the task light, wherein the stowed position is at an interior of the task light, and wherein the reflection member is slidably extendable from the interior of the task light in a direction toward the work surface and into the use position.
Maresh teaches a redirection member (134, fig. 1) comprises a reflective panel (134) that is slidably disposed on the task light (see figs. 1-2), wherein the stowed position is at an interior of the task light (see fig. 1), and wherein the reflection member is slidably extendable from the interior of the task light in a direction toward the work surface and into the use position (see figs. 2 and 6).
Therefore, in view of Maresh, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reflective panel of Nakamats by making it slidably disposed on the task light where the stowed position is at an interior of the task light and the reflection member is slidably extendable from the interior of the task light in a direction toward the work surface and into the use position, in order to adjust the illumination range of the lamp.
Claim 9: Nakamats teaches the light output (2) of the lighting element (1) comprises work surface light (2) directed to the work surface (surface under 27, fig. 5), wherein, when the redirection member is in the use position, the spill light is directed toward the face of the occupant (see fig. 5).
However, Nakamats is silent about the spill light directed away from the work surface, wherein, when the redirection member is in the use position, the spill light is directed toward the face of the occupant while the work surface light remains incident on the work surface.
Maresh teaches a redirection member (134, fig. 1) where the light output (164, fig. 6B) of the lighting element (100, fig. 6B) comprises work surface light (164) directed to the work surface (surface of 160, fig. 6B) and spill light (166, fig. 6B) directed away from the work surface, wherein, when the redirection member (134) is in the use position, the spill light is directed toward the face of the occupant (downward direction in fig. 6b) while the work surface light (164) remains incident on the work surface (160).
Therefore, in view of Maresh, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the redirection member by making it slidable where the light output of the lighting element comprises work surface light (2) directed to the work surface and spill light directed away from the work surface, wherein, when the redirection member is in the use position, the spill light is directed toward the face of the occupant while the work surface light remains incident on the work surface, in order to adjust the illumination range of the lamp and provide additional lighting areas.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamats (US 4,933,822) in view of Moon (US 9,950,662).
Claim 5: Nakamats teaches the redirection member (3) comprises an opaque member (5, fig. 2) moveable between the stowed potion, in which the opaque member (5) blocks output from the lighting element in the direction of the face of the occupant (avoid direct viewing, see Col. 2 lines 43-49), and
However, Nakamats is silent about an opaque member moveable between the stowed position.
Moon teaches a redirection member (140, fig. 3) comprising an opaque member (130, fig. 3) moveable between a stowed position (see fig. 4), and a use position (see fig. 3) in which the opaque member (130) is retracted to expose the lighting element (111, fig. 3) such that the output is directed to the face of the occupant.
Therefore, in view of Moon, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the opaque member by configuring the opaque member to be moveable between a stowed position in which the opaque member blocks output from the lighting element in the direction of the face of the occupant and the use position in which the opaque member is retracted to expose the lighting element such that the output is directed to the face of the occupant, in order to adjust the light distribution.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamats (US 4,933,822) in view of Wang (WO 2015187514).
Claim 7: Nakamats teaches the redirection member comprises a reflective panel (3).
However, Nakamats fails to teach the panel includes at least one of a shaded gradient film and a dot pattern configured to control excessive luminance.
Wang teaches a reflective panel (2020, fig. 20), and the panel includes at least one of a shaded gradient film and a dot pattern (reflective dots in a pattern, see para [0049]) configured to control excessive luminance.
Therefore, in view of Wang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a dot pattern to the reflective panel to control excessive luminance, in order to reduce the glare of the light source.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Carter (US 2,345,235), Neumann (US 3,341,702), Gupta (US 2019/0203892), Waldman (US 5,447,527), Sato et al. (US 4,388,676), Pickard et al. (US 2025/0027625), KR-0129061, DE 10161468, DE 202014001029 disclose a similar lamp.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHENG B SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-9402. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM - 5PM.
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.
/ZHENG SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights