Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 35/526,540

Automotive LED lamp

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Sep 09, 2024
Examiner
LEE, ANGELA J
Art Unit
2933
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Lumileds LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
97%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 97% — above average
97%
Career Allowance Rate
904 granted / 933 resolved
+36.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-2.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 8m
Avg Prosecution
6 currently pending
Career history
937
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
§102
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§112
58.5%
+18.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 933 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Applicant’s response of September 10, 2026, including replacement figures, has been reviewed and the previous refusal/rejection has been withdrawn. The replacement figures include what is considered to be new matter and the claim is finally rejected as necessitated by amendment. Rejection 35 USC 112 – New Matter The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement thereof since the replacement drawings are not supported by the original disclosure. The original disclosure does not reasonably convey to a designer of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor was in possession of the design now claimed at the time the application was filed. See In re Daniels, 144 F.3d 1452, 46 USPQ2d 1788 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 211 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981). Specifically, there is no support in the original disclosure for the automotive LED lamp without certain features on the bottom, interior features, and the different proportions. Previously, the LED lamp was rejected for portions that were indefinite and nonenabing and these portions were omitted from the lamp in the replacement figures. A lamp without those features was not originally disclosed. Additionally, FIGS. 1.2-1.3 show the proportions of the lamp as wider compared to the original disclosure. PNG media_image1.png 508 588 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 385 392 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 498 542 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 393 402 media_image4.png Greyscale To overcome this rejection, applicant may attempt to demonstrate (by means of argument or evidence) that the original disclosure establishes that the inventor had possession of the amended claim or submit replacement figures that include the features that were originally disclosed but reduced to broken lines consistently throughout the views. An amendment to the specification describing the broken lines as forming no part of the claimed design might be appropriate. When preparing new or replacement drawings, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). 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. If all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. 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. Conclusion/Contact Information The claim is rejected for the reasons set forth above. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Applicant is reminded that any reply to this communication must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b). All discussions between the applicant and the examiner regarding the merits of a pending application will be considered an interview and are to be made of record. See MPEP § 713. The examiner will not discuss the merits of the application with applicant's representative if the representative is not registered to practice before the USPTO. Appointment as applicant’s representative before the International Bureau pursuant to Rule 3 of the Common Regulations under the Hague Agreement does NOT entitle such representative to represent the applicant before the USPTO. Furthermore, an applicant that is a juristic entity must be represented by a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Additional information regarding interviews is set forth below. Telephonic or in person interviews A telephonic or in person interview may only be conducted with an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO ("registered practitioner") or with a pro se applicant (an applicant who is the inventor and who is not represented by a registered practitioner). The registered practitioner may either be of record or not of record. To become "of record," a power of attorney (POA) in accordance with 37 CFR 1.32 must be filed in the application. Form PTO/AIA /80 "Power of Attorney to Prosecute Applications Before the USPTO," available at www.uspto.gov/ patent/forms/forms-patent-applications-filed-or-after-september-16-2012, may be used for this purpose. See MPEP § 402.02(a) for further information. Interviews may also be conducted with a registered practitioner not of record provided the registered practitioner can show authorization to conduct an interview by completing, signing and filing an "Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form" (PTOL-413A) (available at the USPTO web page indicated above). See MPEP § 405. For acceptable ways to submit forms to the USPTO, see "When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence" below. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-4453. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 9:00 am to 5:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Richard Kearney, can be reached on 571-272-8312. 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. /A. J. L./ /Angela J Lee/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2933
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 09, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Sep 10, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 08, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1143155
Rear combination lamp for vehicles
1y 4m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent D1134995
Front lamp for vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent D1134996
Vehicle lamp
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent D1130811
Rear combination lamp for automobile
1y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent D1128957
Rear combination lamp for automobile
1y 2m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
97%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (-2.3%)
1y 8m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 933 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month