DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed on 10/7/2025 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 4, 6-7, 14-16, 19-21, 23-24, 27-28, 30, 32 and 34-36 have been cancelled, claims 1-3, 5, 8-10, 12-13, 17-18, 22, 25-26, 29, 31 and 33 have been amended; Currently claims 1-3, 5, 8-10, 12-13, 17-18, 22, 25-26, 29, 31 and 33 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 18, the phrase “the mounting member” on line 5, should be changed to -- a mounting member --..
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the wherein the fixing means comprises includes a through-hole, configured to form a threaded connection with the mounting member by means of a bolt; an extension part is formed on the reflective layer, the extension part extending substantially in a direction opposite to a direction of lateral light emergence of the linear light-emitting element, and the through-hole being formed in the extension part two wing parts with opposite directions of extension are formed on the reflective layer, the two wing parts both extending transversely to a direction of lateral light emergence of the linear light-emitting element, and the through-hole being formed in the two wing parts; and a chamfer is formed at a junction of the wing part with the reflective layer, of claim 13, as the threaded connection and the chamfers appears to belong to two different embodiments. And thus the limitations must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1, 8-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schabacker et al. (US 20190187352 A1, “Schabacker”, cited by the Applicant in IDS filed on 1/7/2026).
Regarding claim 1, Schabacker teaches a linear light-emitting element (Linear light source, see figures 6 and 9), having a lateral light exit region (left region of cladding 6, as seen in fig 6), comprising:
a core layer (core 5) which is rod-shaped (see elongated shape of 5, better seen in fig 7), at least one end face (end 30) of the core layer (5) being configured to receive and allow the entry of light from a light source (light-emitting elements 11);
a cladding layer (6) which envelops an outer peripheral surface (outer surface of 5) of the core layer (5), the cladding layer (6) having a smaller refractive index (refracting index see ¶ 33) than that of the core layer (5), and
light from the core layer (5) entering the cladding layer (6) by refraction (better seen in fig 4);
a transparent light exit layer (layer 151 of multilayer coating 15) which envelops an outer peripheral surface (outer surface of 6) of the cladding layer (6), the transparent light exit layer (151) being configured to transmit light (as inner layer 151 is so thin, in the illustrated example, that it is partially transmissive, see ¶ 47) from the cladding layer (6); and
a reflective layer (layer 152 of 15) which at least partially covers (covering right side of 151) an outer peripheral surface (outer surface of 151) of the transparent light exit layer (151), the reflective layer (152) being configured to be at least partially opposite (as clearly seen in fig 6) a lateral light exit region (left region of 6, as seen in fig 6), so as to reflect light (as expected from a reflecting layer, and better seen in fig 4) from the transparent light exit layer (151) towards the lateral light exit region (left region of 6, as seen in fig 6).
Regarding claim 8, Schabacker teaches wherein a fixing means (mounting profile 27, see fig 9) for fixing the linear light-emitting element (1) to a mounting member (surface 21, see fig 9) is formed on the reflective layer (152).
Regarding claim 9, Schabacker teaches wherein the fixing means (27, see fig 9) includes an engagement part (latching features 28, 29), configured to form a snap-fit connection (as seen in fig 9) with the mounting member (21).
Regarding claim 10, Schabacker teaches wherein the engagement part (28-29) comprises includes an elastic engagement head (see EH in annotated fig below), the elastic engagement head (EH) extending away from the reflective layer (152) and having an arrow-shaped cross section (as clearly seen in fig 9 below), and being configured to cooperate with a through-slot (see opening of 21 for 27 in fig 9) of the mounting member (27), and a hollow part (recess 22, see fig 9) is formed on the elastic engagement head (EH) to facilitate elastic deformation (as expected from a plastic element, as seen in fig 9).
Annotated figure 9 of has been reproduced below:
PNG
media_image1.png
480
748
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Schabacker teaches wherein the engagement part (28-29) comprises includes an engagement face (faces of interspaces 26), which comprises includes at least a portion of an outer surface (outer surface of 152) of the reflective layer (152) and is configured to abut an elastic snap-fit connector (edges of opening of 21) on the mounting member (21).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schabacker.
Regarding claim 2, Schabacker teaches wherein the reflective layer (152) is configured to covers a portion (see area portion covered by 152) of the outer peripheral surface (outer surface of 151) of the transparent light exit layer (151);
the lateral light exit region (left region of 6, as seen in fig 6) includes at least a portion (left region of 6) of the outer peripheral surface (outer surface of 151) of the transparent light exit layer (151); and
the linear light-emitting element (1) includes a flexible optical fiber (as the core cladding structure is typical from an optical fiber) which emits light laterally (better seen in fig 4).
Although Schabacker discloses what appears to be a portion covering a half of the area, Schabacker does not explicitly teach the portion is at least half of the area of the transparent light exit layer.
However, one of ordinary skill would have considered extending the surface area of the reflective layer to further collimate light, including covering a portion equal to at least half of the area of the transparent light exit layer.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide a reflective layer covering at least half of the area of the transparent light exit layer into the teachings of Schabacker, since the applicant has not disclosed that the amount of coverage solves any problem or is for a particular reason. It appears that the claimed invention would perform equally well with at least a half of the area of the transparent light exit layer. In this case, selecting a given coverage would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application.
Claims 3, 5, 22 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schabacker in view of Kanamori. (JP 2017090899 A, “Kanamori”, cited by the Applicant in IDS filed on 1/7/2026).
Regarding claim 3, Schabacker does not explicitly teach wherein:
materials of the transparent light exit layer and the reflective layer are chosen such that adhesion between the transparent light exit layer and the cladding layer is stronger than adhesion between the reflective layer and the cladding layer; and
with the cladding layer being formed of a fluorine-containing material, and the transparent light exit layer being formed of a material containing no fluorine.
Kanamori teaches a linear light-emitting element (circumferential light emitting type light guide rod, see figure 2), wherein:
materials of the transparent light exit layer (core layer 1) and the reflective layer (film layer 4) are chosen such that adhesion between the transparent light exit layer (1) and the cladding layer (clad layer 2) is stronger (as 1 and 2 are integrally molded, and 4 and 2 are glued together with a transparent adhesive, i. e. not integrally formed , see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”) than adhesion between the reflective layer (4) and the cladding layer (2); and
with the cladding layer (2) being formed of a fluorine-containing material (fluorine resin, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”), and the transparent light exit layer (1) being formed of a material containing no fluorine (acrylic resin, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the strong adhesion between the transparent light exit layer and the cladding layer as taught by Kanamori into the teachings of Schabacker, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure the core and cladding layer are secured to each other despite being bent into different shapes.
Regarding claim 5, Schabacker teaches wherein the outer surface (outer surface of 151) of the transparent light exit layer (151) is configured as a flat surface or a curved surface (curved surface as seen in fig 6); but
Schabacker does not explicitly teach wherein: the transparent light exit layer includes a scattering element to scatter light.
Kanamori teaches a linear light-emitting element (circumferential light emitting type light guide rod, see figure 2), wherein:
the transparent light exit layer (core layer 1) includes a scattering element to scatter light (light scattering particles, see ¶ 2 of "Structure of circumferential light-emitting light guide rod").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the strong adhesion between the transparent light exit layer and the cladding layer as taught by Kanamori into the teachings of Schabacker, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to improve the light emission performance as necessary.
Regarding claim 22, Schabacker teaches wherein: a base material of the core layer (5) comprises includes an acrylic block copolymer and/or polymethyl methacrylate;
a base material of the cladding layer (6) includes a fluoropolymer; and the fluoropolymer includes fluorinated ethylene propylene copolymer and/or polyvinylidene difluoride.
Kanamori teaches a linear light-emitting element (circumferential light emitting type light guide rod, see figure 2), wherein:
wherien a base material (acrylic resin, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”) of the core layer (1) comprises includes an acrylic block copolymer and/or polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”);
a base material (fluorine resin) of the cladding layer (2) includes a fluoropolymer (see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”); and the fluoropolymer includes fluorinated ethylene propylene copolymer and/or polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the base materials as taught by Kanamori into the teachings of Schabacker, since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Leshing, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because of the excellent transparency of acrylics and the exceptional chemical resistance and weatherability of fluoropolymers.
Regarding claim 29, Schabacker does not explicitly teach wherein a base material of the reflective layer includes a flexible thermoplastic transparent resin; the flexible thermoplastic transparent resin has a hardness lower than A100 and includes a flexible thermoplastic acrylic resin.
Kanamori teaches a linear light-emitting element (circumferential light emitting type light guide rod, see figure 2), wherein:
wherein a base material (acrylic adhesive, see ¶ 5 of “Tech-solution”) of the reflective layer (3-4) includes a flexible thermoplastic transparent resin (as acrylic is a known thermoplastic resin, and the thin design makes it flexible); the flexible thermoplastic transparent resin (acrylic) has a hardness lower than A100 (as acrylic has a Shore hardness rating on the Shore D scale that is smaller than materials in the A scale) and includes a flexible thermoplastic acrylic resin (acrylic)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the base materials as taught by Kanamori into the teachings of Schabacker, since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Leshing, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because of the excellent transparency of acrylics materials.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schabacker in view of Jablonski Xavier. (US 20090003014 A1, “Jablonski”, cited by the Applicant in IDS filed on 1/7/2026).
Regarding claim 17, Schabacker does not explicitly teach wherein the fixing means comprises includes a bonding part, configured to form an adhesive connection with the mounting member.
Jablonski teaches a linear light-emitting element (light guide 1, see figure 1), wherein:
wherein the fixing means (attachment element 7 with adhesive, see ¶ 107) includes a bonding part (adhesive), configured to form an adhesive connection with the mounting member (another item, such as to an article of clothing or to a device, see ¶ 107).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fixing means as taught by Jablonski into the teachings of Schabacker, in order to easily attach the linear light-emitting element to any surface. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification because adhesives are widely available and cost effective.
Regarding claim 18, Schabacker teaches further comprising an outer lens (curved outer surface of 151 providing a lensing action, as expected from curved light guides) formed as a single piece (as the surface of 151 is integral part of 151) with the transparent light exit layer (151), the lateral light exit region (left region of 6, as seen in fig 6 ) INCLUDES at least a portion of an outer surface (left portion of 151) of the outer lens (curved outer surface of 151); but
Schabacker does not explicitly teach a fixing means for fixing the linear light-emitting element (1) to the mounting member is further formed on the single piece consisting of the outer lens and the transparent light exit layer (151) and the fixing means includes at least one of an engagement part for forming a snap-fit connection with the mounting member, a through-hole forming a threaded connection, and a bonding part forming an adhesive connection.
Jablonski teaches a linear light-emitting element (light guide 1, see figure 9), wherein:
a fixing means (attachment element 7) for fixing the linear light-emitting element (1) to the mounting member (item 17) is further formed on the single piece (as seen in fig 9) consisting of the outer lens (curved outer surface of 4) and the transparent light exit layer (4) and the fixing means (7) includes at least one of an engagement part (see curved shape of 7) for forming a snap-fit connection (as seen in fig 9) with the mounting member (17), a through-hole forming a threaded connection, and a bonding part forming an adhesive connection.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fixing means and mounting member as taught by Jablonski into the teachings of Schabacker, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to easily connect and disconnect the linear light-emitting element from a mounting member.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schabacker in view of Tissot Yann. (US 20140092620 A1, “Tissot”, cited by the Applicant in IDS filed on 1/7/2026).
Regarding claim 25, Schabacker does not explicitly teach wherein the cladding layer includes an ultraviolet absorbing material and a light diffusing material.
Tissot teaches a linear light-emitting element (waveguide apparatus, see figure 1a);
wherein the cladding layer (cladding 101, intermediate layer 102 and photo-luminescent layer 103, see fig 1a) includes an ultraviolet absorbing material (see ¶ 5) and a light diffusing material (scattering structures 105, 106, 107, see fig 1a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the light absorbing and light diffusing materials as taught by Tissot into the teachings of Schabacker in order to redirect and emit a broader bandwidth of the primary light. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to emit a whiter and more even light output.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13, 26, 31 and 33 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.
Regarding claim 13, although Schabacker teaches the linear light-emitting element, as described in claims 1 and 8 above, wherein the fixing means comprises includes a through-hole, configured to form a threaded connection with the mounting member by means of a bolt; an extension part is formed on the reflective layer, the extension part extending substantially in a direction opposite to a direction of lateral light emergence of the linear light-emitting element, and the through-hole being formed in the extension part two wing parts with opposite directions of extension are formed on the reflective layer, the two wing parts both extending transversely to a direction of lateral light emergence of the linear light-emitting element, and the through-hole being formed in the two wing parts; and a chamfer is formed at a junction of the wing part with the reflective layer.
Regarding claim 26, although Schabacker teaches the linear light-emitting element, as described in claim 1 above, and wherein a base material (acrylic resin, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”) of the transparent light exit layer (1) includes a flexible thermoplastic transparent resin (as acrylic is a known thermoplastic resin, and the thin design makes it flexible); the flexible thermoplastic transparent resin (1) has a hardness lower than A100 (as acrylic has a Shore hardness rating on the Shore D scale that is smaller than materials in the A scale) and includes a flexible thermoplastic acrylic resin (acrylic resin of 1); the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach the transparent light exit layer includes an antioxidant material and an ultraviolet absorbing material.
Regarding claims 31 and 33, although Schabacker teaches the linear light-emitting element, as described in claim 1 above, and wherein a base material (acrylic adhesive, see ¶ 5 of “Tech-solution”) of the reflective layer (3-4) includes a flexible thermoplastic transparent resin (as acrylic is a known thermoplastic resin, and the thin design makes it flexible); the flexible thermoplastic transparent resin (acrylic) has a hardness lower than A100 (as acrylic has a Shore hardness rating on the Shore D scale that is smaller than materials in the A scale) and includes a flexible thermoplastic acrylic resin (acrylic).wherein a base material (acrylic adhesive, see ¶ 5 of “Tech-solution”) of the reflective layer (3-4) and a base material (acrylic resin, see ¶ 2 of “Tech-solution”) of the transparent light exit layer (1) are the same; the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach:
(claim 31) the reflective layer (3-4) includes an antioxidant material, an ultraviolet absorbing material, and a color powder and/or color masterbatch; and
(claim 33) wherein the ultraviolet absorbing material includes at least one of low-volatile dimeric 2-hydroxybenzotriazole and hydroxyphenylbenzotriazole.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tazawa et al. (US 20050189545 A1) discloses a linear light-emitting element having a light source emitting light into a rod-shaped core. Light is refracted out through a cladding having a lower index of refraction than the core. The element provides a high performance linear light emitter having optimized angular distribution of outgoing light in peripheral direction and capable of radiating the light from a side peripheral surface with a high directivity without a loss.
Hasegawa et al. (JP 2011044395 A) discloses a linear light-emitting element used in a motor vehicle. The device contains a core and a cladding receiving light from a light source. The optical fiber can be changed according to shape of the accommodating part, thus improving the design of the element.
Kinoshita et al. (WO 2013114747 A1) discloses a linear light-emitting element formed by a core surrounded by a cladding layer, a phosphor layer and a reflective layer for emitting light from one side surface of the element. A thickness of the element can be reduced and several LEDs are accommodated into the element. The power-consumption of the device can be reduced with improved service life.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR ROJAS CADIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-8007. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-6pm.
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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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.
/OMAR ROJAS CADIMA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights