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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: LIGHTWEIGHT WINTERIZED LAMP HAVING A MECHANISM FOR REDUCING ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE LUMINOUS OUTPUT
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 26 June 2026.
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)(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.
Claims 1-2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (U.S. Patent No. 6,010,346).
Regarding Claim 1, Wang discloses in Figures 2-6, a lightweight winterized lamp, including: a snap-on bottom cover 5; a lamp main body base (socket body 20), including a first side to receive a light bulb, and a second side to engage the snap-on bottom cover 5, to define a closed internal space within the lightweight winterized lamp, wherein a portion of an external conductive wire 3 is restrained inside the closed internal space by an engagement between the snap-on bottom cover 5 and the lamp main body base 2; and a winter-resilient mechanism (drainage hole 4), disposed in the closed internal space or the light bulb, or on at least one of the snap-on bottom cover 5 and the lamp main body base 20 (Col 2, lines 43-57), to reduce adverse effects on luminous output of the lightweight winterized lamp attributable to freezing temperatures and/or icing on the lightweight winterized lamp (drainage hole 4 is seen to reduce adverse effects on the operation of the lamp by draining moisture or liquids from inside the socket body 20).
Regarding Claim 2, Wang discloses in Figures 2-6, the lightweight winterized lamp according to claim 1, wherein the winter-resilient mechanism 4 purges moisture from the closed internal space to the outside of the lightweight winterized lamp (Col 2, lines 43-50).
Regarding Claim 13, Wang discloses the lightweight winterized lamp according to claim 1, wherein the snap-on bottom cover 5 is secured to the lamp main body base 20 by a quick-release locking mechanism (two pawls 51, 52 engageable with support plate 21 (Col 2, lines 35-40).
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.
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 applicant is respectfully advised that in examining a pending application, the claims are interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably convey. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 70 USPQ2d. 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2004). MPEP § 2111.01.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 6,010,346) in view of DeGuiseppi (U.S. Patent No. 7,217,314).
Regarding Claims 3 and 5. Wang does not disclose the lightweight winterized lamp according to claim 1, wherein the winter-resilient mechanism includes a moisture-permeable protective vent, which vents the moisture from the closed internal space and prevents outside liquid water from entering the closed internal space wherein the moisture-permeable protective vent includes: a microporous membrane formed of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) with an oleophobic surface treatment; and a membrane sealing element 50a2, formed of a weather-resistant elastomer to bond the microporous membrane to the snap-on bottom cover or the lamp main body base.
DeGuiseppi discloses in Figure 2, a lamp body with a vent having a moisture-permeable protective vent 56, 58, which vents the moisture from the closed internal space and prevents outside liquid water from entering the closed internal space wherein the moisture-permeable protective vent includes: a microporous membrane formed of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) with an oleophobic surface treatment; and a membrane sealing element 50a2, formed of a weather-resistant elastomer to bond the microporous membrane to the snap-on bottom cover or the lamp main body base for preventing moisture or water ingression and pressure stabilization (Col 6, lines 30-37 and Col 7, lines 35-42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate a vent wit a microporous membrane with ePTFE with oleophobic coating to better prevent ingression of moisture into a lamp housing of Wang.
Regarding Claim 4, Wang does not disclose the lightweight winterized lamp according to claim 3, wherein the moisture-permeable protective vent is shielded with a splash shield and/or a labyrinth hood on the outer surface of the lightweight winterized lamp.
DeGuiseppi discloses a vent hole 56. 58 with what is considered a shield or hood 50 or 32 in Figure 4C that is seen to act as a splash guard or shield on the outer surface of the lamp Col 7, lines 1-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine a hood or splashguard to the vent 4 of Wang. All the claimed elements in Wang and DiGuiseppi were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the guard or hood with the vent as claimed with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded the predictable result reducing the ingression of liquid or water into the lamp to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 6,010,346) in view of Mrakovich (U.S. Patent No. 7,160,140).
Wang does not disclose a PCB in the closed internal space, to electrically connect the external conductive wire by piercing an insulation of the external conductive wire during the engagement between the snap-on bottom cover and the lamp main body base.
Mrakovich discloses in Figures 2-7 a light string with LEDs on a PCB where terminals 60, 62 pierce a wire insulation 26 to make the connection at the bottom of the light strip in an IDC (Col 4, lines 20-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use an IDC terminal piercing connector and a PCB for driving the lamp. All the claimed elements in Wang and Mrakovich were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the PCB and IDC connector where terminals pierce the wire as claimed with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded the predictable result providing an easy electrical connection configuration as well as an integrated circuit for powering the light source of the lamp to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 6,010,346) in view of Boghossian (U.S. PG Publication No. 2007/0019403).
Wang does not expli9citlyd disclose a light bulb is substantially made of an explosion-resistant transparent material.
Boghossian discloses a portable light assembly having a bulb with an explosion proof jacket (Para 0046).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to render the light string having bulbs that are explosion proof. All the claimed elements in Wang and Boghossian were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the explosion proof bulb characteristic with the lamp of the Wang as claimed with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded the predictable result providing a safe and resilient lamp for outdoor use to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 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 closest prior art does not teach or suggest alone or in combination an icing-prone region on an outer surface of the lightweight winterized lamp around a moisture-permeable protective vent, is covered with an ice-phobic coating to reduce a static ice-adhesion strength on the outer surface of the lightweight winterized lamp; or, the lightweight winterized lamp further includes a resonator to induce mechanical vibration over the icing-prone region, to shed accreted ice from the outer surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Verfuerth (U.S. Patent No. 8,866,582) discloses a lamp with a vent having a porous membrane.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J MAY whose telephone number is (571)272-5919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-3:30pm.
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, 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.
/ROBERT J MAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights