DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. DE 102024212305.6 was filed with the Office on 03/05/2026. Accordingly, the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention was recognized as 12/27/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/03/2026 was 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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
On line 3 the term "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the term are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). The Examiner has interpreted the limitations as included. Accordingly, the Examiner has interpreted “preferably less” as –
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.
Claims 1-6, 9-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harvey et al. (US 20160223185 A1; “Harvey”).
Re Claim 1:
Harvey discloses a worksite lamp (portable light 10, shown in at least Fig 1 and described below), comprising:
a housing (housing 15);
at least one battery receptacle interface (battery ports 20) arranged on the housing (arrangement on 15 shown in Fig 1);
at least one lighting unit (LEDs 95 and light support 105 shown in at least Figs 6 and 10, described in at least 0045) configured to emit light over an angular range of more than 120° (360° angular range due to the configuration shown in at least Figs 6 and 10); and
at least one fluid-conducting unit (chimney 100) configured to conduct fluid through the housing (though 215) and through the lighting unit (through configuration of 95 and 105) past the battery receptacle interface (past 20; shown in Figs 3-5 transposed with Figs 6 and 10; described in at least ¶¶ 0043-0045).
Re Claim 2:
Harvey further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit comprises at least one fluid inlet (finned inlet member 110) which is arranged in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (110 is near 20; shown in Fig 3).
Re Claim 3:
Harvey further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (100) comprises at least one further fluid outlet element (finned inlet member 100) arranged on a side of the housing facing away from the lighting unit (side of 15 away from 95, Fig 3 transposed with Fig 1).
Re Claim 4:
Harvey further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (100) comprises at least one fluid inlet outlet element (apertures 115) arranged on a side of the lighting unit facing away from the housing (shown in Fig 3 transposed with Fig 1; 115 is shown facing radially out in a direction out and away from 15).
Re Claim 5:
Harvey further discloses at least one sealing unit (described in ¶ 0043 as Seals and ¶ 0044 as seal) arranged at least between the fluid-conducting unit and the housing to counteract ingress of water (described in ¶ 0043 as Seals are formed between the chimney 100 and the housings 15 to maintain the substantially water-tight space and described in ¶ 0044 as A seal between the finned member 110, the chimney 100, and the housing 15 inhibits access to the chimney 100 by a user and/or debris entrance into the chimney 100).
Re Claim 6:
Harvey further discloses at least one power and control electronics unit (control unit 45) configured to control or regulate the at least the lighting unit (shown in Fig 1 and described in ¶ 0033), wherein the fluid-conducting unit (100) is configured to conduct the fluid past the power and control electronics unit (configuration in Fig 2 transposed with Fig 3).
Re Claim 9:
Harvey further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (100) comprises at least one fluid inlet element (finned inlet member 110) and at least one further fluid outlet element (apertures 115), which are arranged on the housing (at least indirectly; Fig 3 transposed with Fig 1) and delimit an inlet and outlet opening in different planes (arrangement shown in Fig 3).
Re Claim 10:
Harvey further discloses the lighting unit (95, 105) comprises at least one heat sink (105; also described as a heat sink in ¶ 0043) which bounds a channel of the fluid-conducting unit (channel of 100 is concentrically bounded inside channel of central apertures 145 shown in Fig 8), and the channel is fluidically connected to a further channel of the fluid-conducting unit (channel of 100 near 20 and 110) which is arranged on the housing and opens in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (channel of 100 near 110 shown with an opening near 20 in Fig 3).
Re Claim 11:
Harvey further discloses wherein: the worksite lamp is a 360° worksite lamp (due to the configuration shown in at least Fig 5 transposed with Figs 8 and 10 ), and the at least one lighting unit is configured to emit light over an angular range of more than 180° (due to the configuration shown in at least Fig 5 transposed with Figs 8 and 10).
Re Claim 12:
Harvey further discloses wherein the fluid is cooling air (described in at least ¶ 0044 as cooling air).
Re Claims 13-14:
Harvey further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (100) comprises at least one fluid inlet fluid inlet element (finned inlet element) which is arranged in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (region near 20, shown in at least Fig 3), with a with a smallest distance of less than 100 mm and less than 20 mm (because as shown in the configuration of Fig 3 the region 110 overlaps the region of 20).
Re Claim 15:
Harvey further discloses wherein the at least one fluid outlet element (115) is at least one upper fluid outlet element (shown in Fig 5 transposed with Fig 6).
Re Claim 17:
Harvey further discloses wherein: the lighting unit (95 and 105) comprises at least one heat sink (105; also described as a heat sink in ¶ 0043) which bounds a substantially fully closed channel of the fluid-conducting unit (channel of 100 is concentrically bounded inside channel of central apertures 145 shown in Fig 8), and the substantially fully closed channel is fluidically connected to a further channel of the fluid-conducting unit (channel of 100 near 20 and 110) which is arranged on the housing (at least indirectly, Fig 8 transposed with Figs 1-3) and opens in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (channel of 100 near 110 shown with an opening near 20 in Fig 3).
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 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harvey.
Harvey further discloses wherein: the battery receptacle interface (20), viewed along a battery insertion direction (in the direction from 25 to 110, shown in Fig 3) of the battery receptacle interface (of 20), has a minimum distance relative to an outer housing surface of the housing (necessarily occurring minimum distance to housing 15, shown in at least Fig 1), and the at least one fluid inlet element (110) is arranged behind the battery receptacle interface (behind 20, shown in Fig 3) along the insertion direction (Fig 3 transposed with Figs 1-2).
With further regard to distance, it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (“PHOSITA”)to recognize Puzio as at least suggesting an equivalent minimum distance to the claimed minimum distance of greater than 10 mm and greater than 30mm for the purpose of providing fluid channel pathways (described in ¶¶ 0043-0045).
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-10, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber et al. (US 20130258645 A1; “Weber”).
Re Claim 1:
Weber discloses a worksite lamp (area light 20; shown in Figs 11-14; described in at least ¶ 0043 as well as below), comprising:
a housing (housing 215);
at least one battery receptacle interface (battery portion 230) arranged on the housing (arranged in 215; shown in at least Fig 13 and described in at least ¶ 0045);
at least one lighting unit (light-emitting portion 225, Figs 12 and 14, ¶ 0046) configured to emit light in an optimized manner (configuration shown in Figs 11-14; described in at least ¶¶ 0046-0047, specifically including via optimization of the lens 250); and
at least one fluid-conducting unit (two end caps 220 and heat sink 350) configured to conduct fluid through the housing (215) and through the lighting unit (325) past the battery receptacle interface (past 230 at least via air space 385; shown in at least Fig 12 and described in at least ¶ 0054).
With further regard to light emission optimization, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2nd 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Weber as at least suggesting the capability to optimized the light emission to the claimed range of over an angular range of more than 120° due to the optimization described in ¶¶ 0046-0047, specifically including via optimization of the lens 250.
Re Claim 2:
Weber further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (220, 350) comprises at least one fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (vent plates 275 with vent opening 380 and air space 385, Fig 13) which is arranged in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (near 230).
Re Claim 3:
Weber further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (220, 350) comprises at least one further fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (vent plates 375 with vent opening 380 and air space 385, Fig 13) arranged on a side of the housing facing away from the lighting unit (the Examiner notes the vent openings 380 and the portion of air space 385 shown in Fig 13 is on a side of 12 facing away from 225).
Re Claim 6:
Weber further discloses at least one power and control electronics unit (control unit 260) configured to control or regulate the at least the lighting unit (described in ¶ 0049 with at least controller 260 includes external buttons 262 that can be actuated by the user to selectively provide power to the LEDs 255 at different levels, (e.g., off, low, and high), each level corresponding to a brightness or intensity of the light emitted by the LEDs 255), wherein the fluid-conducting unit (220, 350) is configured to conduct the fluid past the power and control electronics unit (via at least vent openings 380 and air space 385; shown in Figs 12-13).
Re Claim 8:
Weber further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (220, 350) comprises at least one fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (vent plates 375 with vent openings 380 and air space 385) and at least one further fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (legs 360), which are arranged in each case, on an outer housing surface of the housing (on housing 215, at least indirectly, shown in Figs 11-12) and at least partially delimit a receiving space (specifically including space of 260) in which a battery pack (battery pack 235, Fig 12, ¶ 0044) is arranged in a state arranged at the battery receptacle interface (Figs 11-12, ¶ 0044).
Re Claim 9:
Weber further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (220, 350) comprises at least one fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (vent plates 375 with opening 380 and air space 385, Fig 13) and at least one further fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (legs 360), which are arranged on the housing (on 215, at least indirectly, shown in Figs 11-12) and delimit an inlet and outlet opening in different planes (specifically including the planes of the openings between fins 370, best shown in Fig 13).
Re Claim 10:
Weber further discloses wherein: the lighting unit comprises at least one heat sink which bounds a channel of the fluid-conducting unit, and the channel is fluidically connected to a further channel of the fluid-conducting unit which is arranged on the housing and opens in a near region of the battery receptacle interface.
Re Claim 12:
Weber further discloses wherein the fluid is cooling air (described in at least ¶ 0054 as surrounding air and ambient atmosphere).
Re Claims 13-14:
Weber further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (220, 350) comprises at least one fluid inlet fluid outlet element (air opening 385) which is arranged in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (region near 230; 385 is shown directly next to 230 in Fig 13).
With further regard to regions, drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979); see also MPEP 2125. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Weber as at least suggesting the configuration of the region of air space 385 directly next to the region of 230, which is necessarily less than a distance of less than 100 mm and less than 20 mm.
Claims 1-7, 9-10, and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Puzio et al.(US 20200340634 A1; listed as Cite No. 2 under Patent Application Publications in the IDS filed on 02/03/2026; “Puzio”) in view of Weber.
Re Claim 1:
Puzio discloses a worksite lamp (lighting apparatus 10; shown in Figs 1-10 and description in at least ¶ 0030-0031 as well as below), comprising:
a housing (housing 12, best shown in Fig 10);
at least one battery receptacle interface (battery receptacle 18) arranged on the housing (specifically near second cavity 52);
at least one lighting unit (lighting module 16) configured to emit light over an angular range (described in ¶ 0037 as LED light emits lights at an angle θ of, for example, 30 to 60 degrees with respect to a plane of the rear mounting platform); and
at least one fluid-conducting unit (first second cavities 50 and 52, respectively, and ridge vent 78) configured to conduct fluid through the housing and through the lighting unit (16) past the battery receptacle interface (past 18; shown with paths C-E in Fig 10 transposed with Figs 1 and 4; described in at least ¶ 0048).
Puzio does not disclose that the angular range is of more than 120°
However, with further regard to angular range, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2nd 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Further, Weber teaches light emission optimization (described in at least ¶¶ 0046-0047, specifically including via optimization of the lens 250). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to optimize the light emission of Puzio, specifically including an angular range, more specifically including to of more than 120° for the benefit of an increased illumination area in a work space.
Re Claim 2:
Puzio further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78) comprises at least one fluid inlet and outlet element (52) which is arranged in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (region near 18, Fig 10).
Re Claim 3:
Puzio further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78) comprises at least one further fluid inlet and outlet element 50 arranged on a side of the housing facing away from the lighting unit (away from 16, Fig 1 transposed with Fig 10).
Re Claim 4:
Puzio further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78) comprises at least one fluid outlet element (78) arranged on a side of the lighting unit facing away from the housing (Fig 1 transposed with Fig 10).
Re Claim 5:
Puzio further discloses at least one sealing unit (shown in Fig 8 and described in ¶ 0046 as a side walls 70 and 72 and top light cover 32 tongue-and-groove arrangement) arranged between the fluid-conducting unit (specifically 50) and the lighting unit (16) so as to counteract ingress of water (described ¶ 0046 as water ingress).
Re Claim 6:
Puzio further discloses at least one power and control electronics unit (described in ¶ 0042 as controller) configured to control or regulate the at least the lighting unit (¶ 0042), wherein the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78) is configured to conduct the fluid past the power and control electronics unit (via path C shown in Fig 10 described in ¶ 0048).
Re Claims 7 and 16:
Puzio further discloses wherein: the battery receptacle interface (18), viewed along a battery insertion direction (insertion direction A, shown in Fig 5 described in ¶ 0043; the Examiner notes that “A” is only shown in Fig 5 but not described, and only described in ¶ 0043 as slidingly receiving the battery 20) of the battery receptacle interface (of 18), has a minimum distance relative to an outer housing surface of the housing (necessarily occurring minimum distance to clam shell 12b), and the at least one fluid inlet and fluid outlet element (52) is arranged behind the battery receptacle interface (18) along the insertion direction (Fig 3 transposed with Figs 4 and 10).
With further regard to distance, it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Puzio as at least suggesting an equivalent minimum distance to the claimed minimum distance of greater than 10 mm and greater than 30mm for the purpose of providing fluid channel pathways (shown by Puzio in Fig 10 with paths C-E and described in at least ¶ 0048).
Re Claim 9:
Puzio further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78) comprises at least one fluid inlet element (space in 52 for path C) and at least one further fluid outlet element (72), which are arranged on the housing and delimit an inlet and outlet opening in different planes (configuration shown in Fig 10 as evident by Paths C and E).
Re Claim 10:
Puzio further discloses wherein: the lighting unit (16) comprises at least one heat sink (heat sinks 30 and 40) which bounds a channel (path D) of the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78), and the channel is fluidically connected to a further channel (channel with merged paths C and D; shown in Fig 10 and described in ¶ 0048) of the fluid-conducting unit (of 50, 52, 78) which is arranged on the housing (Fig 1 transposed with Fig 10) and opens in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (shown in Fig 10, path D is near 18).
Re Claim 12:
Puzio further discloses wherein the fluid is cooling air (described in ¶ 0048 as cooling air).
Re Claim 13-14:
Puzio further discloses wherein the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78) comprises at least one fluid inlet fluid inlet and outlet element (50) which is arranged in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (region near 18, shown in at least Fig 10).
With further regard to regions, drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979); see also MPEP 2125. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Puzio as at least suggesting the configuration of the region of 50 directly next to the region of 18, which is necessarily less than a distance of less than 100 mm and less than 20 mm.
Re Claim 15:
Puzio further discloses wherein the at least one fluid outlet element (78) is at least one upper fluid outlet element (shown in Fig 10).
Re Claim 17:
Puzio further discloses wherein: the lighting unit comprises at least one heat sink (30, 40) which bounds a substantially fully closed channel (channel for path D, shown in Fig 10 and described ¶ 0048 ) of the fluid-conducting unit (50, 52, 78), and the substantially fully closed channel (channel of path D) is fluidically connected to a further channel of the fluid-conducting unit (connected to path C in 52) which is arranged on the housing (specifically including on partition 28) and opens in a near region of the battery receptacle interface (the regions near path D open near 18, shown in Fig 10; the Examiner notes that regions both paths C and D are near 18).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sharrah et al. (US 20110121727 A1) disclose a worksite lamp comprising a fluid-conducting unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH G DELAHOUSSAYE whose telephone number is (469)295-9088. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00 am-5:00 pm CST.
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, James Greece can be reached at (571) 272-3711. 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.
KEITH G. DELAHOUSSAYE JR.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/KEITH G. DELAHOUSSAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights