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 .
Benefit
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for domestic benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119 (e). Accordingly, the earliest effective filing date was recognized as 01/17/2025.
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 15 and 20 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 lines 3-4, the claim recites “the canopy”; however, there is no antecedent bases for a canopy recited in claim 11, from which the claim depends. Therefore, the claim is indefinite. Upon further inspection of the claims, a canopy’s only other recitation is in claim 1, from which the claim does not depend. Therefore, it is unclear if canopy and the following limitations were intended to be included in the claim. Accordingly, the Examiner has interpreted “via a fastener, and the canopy being securable to the second end of the mounting bracket via an attachment band” as – via a fastener
Re Claim 20:
On lines 2-3, the claim recites “the first end” ; however, there is no antecedent bases for a first recited in claim 16, from which the claim depends. Therefore, the claim is indefinite. Upon further inspection of the claims, a first end only other recitations are in claims 1, 7, and 15, from which the claim does not depend. Therefore, it is unclear if the first end was intended to be included in the claim. Accordingly, the Examiner has interpreted “through the first end of the body” on lines 2-3 as – through the
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Shima et al. (US 11047549 B2; “Shima”).
Shima discloses a lighting assembly (lighting device 1; shown in Figs 1-8; described in Col 9, ~ lines 15-50 as well as below), comprising:
a body (cover 40) defining a cavity (occupied by at least light source portion 10, optical member 20.and diffuser plate 30; Fig 8);
a lens (20) including a first portion (first and second light condensers 22 and 23, respectively) and a second portion (first light guide portion 24) disposed in the cavity (Fig 8), wherein the second portion surrounds the first portion (24 surrounds 22-23; best shown in Fig 5C);
a first light source (first light-emitting elements 11; Fig 3) arranged in the cavity (Fig 8) and configured to emit light through the first portion (though 22-23, Fig 6), and a second light source (second light-emitting elements; Fig 3) arranged in the cavity (Fig 8) and configured to emit light through the second portion (through 24, Fig 7);
wherein the first (11) and second (12) light sources are toggleable between a plurality of a power states (described in at least Col 9, ~ lines 34-67 (end of column)), including:
a first power state in which the first light source emits light through the first portion and the second light source abstains from emitting light (shown in Fig 6; described at least in Col 9, ~ line 62 as (only) the first light-emitting elements 12);
a second power state in which the second light source emits light through the second portion and the first light source abstains from emitting light (shown in Fig 7; described in at least Col 9, ~ line 53 as only the second light-emitting elements 12);
a third power state in which the first and second light sources emit light through the first and second portions simultaneously (described in at least Col 9, ~ lines 66-67 as both the first light-emitting elements 11 and the second light-emitting elements 12); and
a fourth power state in which the first and second light sources both abstain from emitting light (described in at least Col 9, ~ lines 59-61 as both the first light-emitting elements 11 and the second light-emitting elements 12 may be switched OFF when the room is vacant).
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 20180245771 A1; “Liu”).
Re Claim 1:
Liu discloses a lighting assembly (illumination device 100; shown in at least Figs 1-6; described in at least ¶¶ 0040-0047 as well as below), comprising:
a body (housing 10, Figs 3 and 5) extending between a first end (end proximate to and below light source module 40) and a second end (end proximate to and surrounding reflective member 20) opposite the first end (Figs 3 and 5), wherein the body defines a cavity (occupied by 100 excluding 10, Figs 3 and 5);
a first lens (second lens 31; Fig 2) disposed in the cavity (Figs 3 and 5);
a second lens (first lens 32; Fig 2) disposed in the cavity at the first end of the body (Figs 3 and 5) and defining a central opening (occupied by 31), wherein the first lens (31) is positioned in the central opening (Fig 2 transposed with Figs 3 and 5);
a first light source (second light source 43) configured to emit light through the first lens (Fig 2 transposed with Figs 1, 3, and 5) to provide a forward-facing light (Fig 1 transposed with Fig 8 and ¶¶ 0053-0054);
a second light source (first light source 42) configured to emit light through the second lens (Fig 2 transposed with Figs 1, 3, and 5) to provide a forward-facing light (Fig 1 transposed with Fig 8 and ¶¶ 0053-0054); and
and wherein the light from the emitted from the second lens is wider than light from the first lens (¶¶ 0053-0054).
With further regard to the first light source (43) and first lens (31), 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 Liu as at least suggesting that the light emitted from the first lens as being an equivalent light to the claimed spotlight for the purpose of being narrower than light emitted from the second lens.
With further regard to the second light source (42) and first lens (32), it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Liu as at least suggesting that the light emitted from the second lens as being an equivalent light to the claimed flood light for the purpose of being wider than light emitted from the first lens.
With regard to for a canopy, the italicized text is further recited in the body of the claim, and not of the limitation in the body of the claim require a canopy. Accordingly, upon analysis consistent with guidance in MPEP § 2111.02 II, for a canopy has been determined an intended use. Further, because Liu discloses all of the structural limitations and discloses or at least suggests all of the functional limitations, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Liu as at least suggesting that the light lighting assembly (100) is capably of having the intended use of a canopy.
Re Claim 2:
Liu further discloses power supply (not shown but described as a drive module in ¶ 0041) receivable within the cavity (due to the configuration shown in Fig 2 transposed with Figs 3 and 5) and electrically connected to the first and second light sources (described in ¶ 0041).
Liu does not disclose the power supply is a rechargeable power supply.
The Examiner takes Official Notice that rechargeable power supplies were well-known within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the power supply of Liu as a well-known rechargeable power supply for the benefit of extended use.
Re Claim 3:
In the embodiment of Figs 1-6, Liu does not explicitly disclose a port for receiving an external power supply accessible through an opening defined in the body, the port being electrically connected to the first and second light sources.
In the embodiment shown at least Fig 14 and described in at least ¶ 0058 (“example 3”), Liu teaches a port (necessarily occurring nodes that electrically connects lead 60’ is to light source module 40’) for receiving an external power supply (power supply assembly 80’ via lead 60’) accessible through an opening defined in the body (opening in housing 10’ that is necessarily occurring for lead 60’ to electrically connect with light source module 40’), the port (necessarily occurring nodes) being electrically connected to the first and second light sources (being electrically connected to first light source (second light source 43’) and second light source (first light source 42’) due to the connection of 60’ to 40’ as described in ¶ 0040).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the lighting assembly of Liu with a power supply as taught (in at least principle) by example 3 of Liu for the benefit of providing power to the first and second light sources.
Re Claim 4:
Liu further discloses wherein the first light source and the second light source are mounted to a substrate (substrate 41), and wherein the second light source is positioned around the first light source (42 is positioned around 43; Fig 2).
With further regard to the substrate (41), 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 Liu as at least suggesting the substrate is a printed circuit board (PCB) due the configuration shown in Fig 2, specifically including the configuration of the first and second light sources (43 and 42, respectively). Further, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Liu as at least suggesting an equivalent structure (substrate 41) to the claimed printed circuit board (PCB) for the purpose of mounting the first and second light source (43 and 42, respectively in Fig 2). Furthermore, the Examiner takes Official notice that printed circuit boards (PCBs) were well-known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the substrate of Liu as a well-known printed circuit board (PCB) for the purpose of mounting the first and second light sources of Liu.
Re Claim 5:
Liu further discloses wherein the first light source (43) is a surface-mount device (SMD) light mounted (configuration shown in Fig 2) to a center of a substrate (to a center of substrate 41), and wherein the second light source (42) includes a plurality of SMDs (Fig 2) mounted to the substrate (mounted to 41) around the first light source (42 mounted to 41 around 43), wherein a gap is defined on the substrate (41) between the first (43) and second (42) light sources (gaps shown in Fig 2).
With further regard to the substrate (41), 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 Liu as at least suggesting the substrate is a printed circuit board (PCB) due the configuration shown in Fig 2, specifically including the configuration of the first and second light sources (43 and 42, respectively). Further, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Liu as at least suggesting an equivalent structure (substrate 41) to the claimed printed circuit board (PCB) for the purpose of mounting the first and second light source (43 and 42, respectively in Fig 2). Furthermore, the Examiner takes Official notice that printed circuit boards (PCBs) were well-known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the substrate of Liu as a well-known printed circuit board (PCB) for the purpose of having a definitive structure to mounting the first and second light sources of Liu.
Claims 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Huijgen et al. (US 20250237372 A1; “Huijgen”).
Re Claim 11:
Liu discloses a lighting assembly (illumination device 100; shown in at least Figs 1-6; described in at least ¶¶ 0040-0047 as well as below), comprising:
a body (housing 10, Figs 3 and 5) defining a cavity (occupied by 100 excluding 10, Figs 3 and 5);
a lens (lens combination 30; Fig 2) including a first portion (second lens 31) and a second portion (first lens 32) disposed in the cavity (Figs 3 and 5), wherein the second portion surrounds the first portion (Fig 2);
a first light source (second light source 43; Fig 2) arranged in the cavity (Figs 3 and 5) and configured to emit light through the first portion (Figs 3 and 5; ¶¶ 0053-0054); and
a second light source (first light source 42; Fig 2) arranged in the cavity (Figs 3 and 5) and configured to emit light through the second portion (Figs 3 and 5; ¶¶ 0053-0054).
Liu does not disclose:
the body includes a connector defining socket; and
a mounting assembly including:
a ball joint positioned in the socket, thereby defining a joint; and
a mounting bracket coupled to the ball joint.
Huijgen teaches a lighting assembly (directional lighting device 10; shown in at least Figs 1 and 2A-2B; described in at least ¶ 0017 as well as below) comprising:
a body (housing 13) including a connector defining socket (tube end 13a); and
a mounting assembly including (supporting structure 11 and ball joint structure 12):
a ball joint positioned in the socket (12 positioned in 13a), thereby defining a joint (shown in Figs 2A-2B and described in at least ¶ 0022); and
a mounting bracket coupled to the ball joint (11 coupled to 12).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to modify the lighting assembly of Liu by including a connector defining socket and mounting assembly as taught (in at least principle) by Huijgen for the benefit of added directional illumination though swiveling.
Re Claim 15:
Due the combination in claim 11, Liu further discloses wherein the mounting bracket (11) extends between a first end (end away from 13) and a second end (end proximate to 13) opposite the first end (Fig 2B), the ball joint (12) being securable to the first end of the mounting bracket via a fastener (via mounting flange 12b; Fig 2B; ¶ 0019).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shima in view of Liu.
Re Claim 17:
Shima a substrate (wiring substrate ) in electrical communication with the first (11) and second (12) light sources (necessarily occurring due to the configurations shown in Figs 6-7; described in at least Col 9, ~ lines 35-60).
Shima does not explicitly describe the wiring as a PCB; however, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize the substrate of Shima as a PCB due to the configuration shown in at least Fig 3. Further, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Shima as at least suggesting an equivalent substrate to the claimed substrate (PCB) for the purpose of mounting the first and second light source. Furthermore, , the Examiner takes Official notice that PCBs were well-known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the substrate of Shima as a well-known printed circuit board (PCB) for the purpose of mounting the first and second light sources of Shima.
Shima does not disclose wherein the PCB includes an electronic device operable to control the first and second light sources.
Liu teaches an electronic device (not shown but described as a drive module in ¶ 0041) operable to control the first and second light sources (¶ 0041).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the PCB of Shima by including an electronic device as taught (in at least principle) by Liu for the benefit of having an definite structure to control the first and second light sources.
With further regard to the electronic device, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Shima as at least suggesting an equivalent electronic device (Liu: drive module) to the claimed electronic device (actuator) for the purpose of controlling the first and second light sources.
Re Claim 18:
Due to the combination in claim 17, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Shima as at least suggesting wherein the PCB is operable to control a brightness of the first and second light sources based on a first type of actuation of the actuator (described in at least Col 9, ~ lines 34-40 as brighter).
Re Claim 19:
Due to the combination in claim 17, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to recognize Shima as at least suggesting wherein the PCB is operable to switch the first (11) and second (12) power sources between the plurality of power states based on a second type of actuation of the actuator (Liu: drive module) different than the first type of actuation (stemming from the vicinity of a human in/not in a work space as described in at least Col 9, ~ lines 50-67).
Claim 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shima.
With regard to power states, 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 Shima as at least suggesting:
wherein the first (11 on ) and third (11 and 12 on) power states provide spotlight illumination through the first end of the body (due to the inclusion lights L1 and L2 shown in Fig 6), and
wherein the second (12 on) and third power (12 and 13) states provide floodlight illumination through the first end of the body (due to the inclusion of lights L3 shown in Fig 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10 and, 12-14 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.
Below is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Re Claim 6:
The closest prior art of record (Shima and Liu) fail to any one of disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the combined structure and functionality of the second lens as set forth in the claim.
Re Claim 7:
The closest prior art of record (Shima and Liu) fail to any one of disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the combined structure and functionality of the cone as set forth in the claim.
Re Claim 8:
The closest prior art of record (Shima and Liu) fail to any one of disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the combined structure and functionality of the interference fit as set forth in the claim.
Re Claim 9:
The closest prior art of record (Shima and Liu) fail to any one of disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the combined structure and functionality of the locking ring as set forth in the claim.
Re Claim 10:
The claim contains allowable subject matter due to its dependence on intervening claim 9.
Re Claim 12:
The closest prior art of record (Shima and Liu) fail to any one of disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the combined structure and functionality of the flanges as set forth in the claim.
Re Claim 13:
The claim contains allowable subject matter due to its dependence on intervening claim 12.
Re Claim 14:
The closest prior art of record (Shima and Liu) fail to any one of disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the combined structure and functionality of the first threads as set forth in the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cercone et al. (US 20030123252 A1) disclose a pivotable light assembly.
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