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 amendment filed on 11/4/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-15 are pending in the Application.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-15 objected to because of the following informalities: “a circumferential reflective side wall” is first recited in claim 1, but future recitations of the element changes from claim to claim, claim 1 has “the circumferential side wall”, claim 3-4, 8-10 has “the reflective side wall”. Terminology should be consistent within and between claims. Appropriate correction is required. The remaining claims are objected to due to their dependence on claim 1.
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 2 and 5 and 7 are 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.
Claims 2 and 5 recites the limitation "the light exit window". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of claim Examination, the Examiner will interpret “the light exit window” as “the light emission window”, which is recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-15 are allowed.
Claims 2, 5, 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 recites, inter alia, A reflector cup comprising: a square base for a light source ;a rounded rectangular light emission window opposite the base, wherein the light emission window has a larger area than the base; an optical axis extending through the base and the light emission window; and a circumferential reflective side wall extending around the optical axis and connecting the base and the light emission window, wherein different regions of the reflective side wall at different locations around the optical axis have different curvatures as seen in a plane in which the optical axis extends, and wherein the circumferential side wall comprises a first pair of diagonally arranged first corners with a first curvature radius and a second pair of diagonally arranged second corners with a second curvature radius, wherein the first curvature radius is different from the second curvature radius.
The references of record do not teach or suggest the aforementioned limitations, nor would it be obvious to modify those references to include such limitations.
Prior art reference Wang, CN 201858594 U (all citations will be made to the English language translation provided by Google Patents) discloses “A reflector cup comprising: a square base (3, Fig. 1-4) for a light source (2, Fig. 1) ;a rounded rectangular light emission window (seen in Fig. 4-5) opposite the base, wherein the light emission window has a larger area than the base (seen in Fig. 5-7); an optical axis extending through the base and the light emission window (seen in Fig. 6-7); and a circumferential reflective side wall extending around the optical axis and connecting the base and the light emission window (seen in Fig. 2-4), wherein different regions of the reflective side wall at different locations around the optical axis have different curvatures as seen in a plane in which the optical axis extends (seen in Fig. 2-4).
However, Wang does not disclose “the circumferential side wall comprises a first pair of diagonally arranged first corners with a first curvature radius and a second pair of diagonally arranged second corners with a second curvature radius, wherein the first curvature radius is different from the second curvature radius.”
Prior art reference Gassner et al., US 2016/0273734 A1 discloses “A reflector cup comprising: a square base for a light source (1, Fig. 2-3); a rounded rectangular light emission window opposite the base (seen in Fig. 2-3, the embodiments with the circular opening), wherein the light emission window has a larger area than the base (seen in Fig. 3); an optical axis extending through the base and the light emission window (seen in Fig. 3); and a circumferential reflective side wall extending around the optical axis and connecting the base and the light emission window (seen in Fig. 2-3),
However, Gassner does not disclose “ wherein different regions of the reflective side wall at different locations around the optical axis have different curvatures as seen in a plane in which the optical axis extends, and wherein the circumferential side wall comprises a first pair of diagonally arranged first corners with a first curvature radius and a second pair of diagonally arranged second corners with a second curvature radius, wherein the first curvature radius is different from the second curvature radius.”
The remaining Claims would be allowable due to their dependence on claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Madril et al., US 10337695 B2 discloses a reflector cup with different curved surfaces
Smith, US 2015/0285442 A1 discloses a reflector cup with different curved surfaces
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL CHIANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3811. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 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, James R 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.
/MICHAEL CHIANG/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/JAMES R GREECE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights