Ex Parte Honma et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardJul 27, 201613124911 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 27, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 13/124,911 04/19/2011 136186 7590 07/29/2016 Lumileds LLC 370 West Trimble Road San Jose, CA 95131 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Shin'ichi Honma UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 2008P01201 WOUS 1800 EXAMINER CHANG, DANIEL D ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2844 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 07/29/2016 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address( es): nancy.glynn@philips.com us-ip@patentlawgroup.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte SHIN'ICHI HONMA and JOSEF A. SCHUG Appeal2014-009848 Application 13/124,911 Technology Center 2800 Before ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, and LILAN REN, Administrative Patent Judges. COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal2014-009848 Application 13/124,911 Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 the final rejection of claims 1-12. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM. Appellants' invention is directed to the field of LED (light emitting diode) lights for a motor vehicle, particularly as a bending light (Spec. 1 :7- 8). Claim 1 is illustrative: 1. An LED light for a motor vehicle, comprising several LED fields, each LED field comprising at least one LED, wherein the LED fields are connected in series by the driving electronics and the driving electronics is adapted to switch on and off each LED field according to its position in the series in dependence of a signal, a housing configured to support the LED fields and a circuit board comprising a driving electronics for operating the LED fields, the circuit board being connectable to an outside of the LED light located current source and being configured to apply an electrical current to the LED fields, wherein the circuit board is integrated into the housing. Appellants appeal the following rejection 1: Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Pickholz (WO 2010/141721 A2 published December 9, 2010) in view of Yamamoto (US 2008/0094000 Al published April 24, 2008). Appellants' arguments focus on the subject matter of claim 1 only (App. Br. 5-9). Claims 2-12 will stand or fall with our analysis regarding the rejection of claim 1. 1 The Examiner withdrew the 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, rejection of claim 1 (Ans. 7). 2 Appeal2014-009848 Application 13/124,911 FINDINGS OF FACT & ANALYSIS Appellants do not dispute the Examiner's conclusion that it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Pickholz and Yamamoto (App. Br. 5-9). Rather, Appellants contend that Yamamoto fails to teach that the LED fields are connected in series by the driving electronics and the driving electronics are adapted to switch on and off each LED field according to its position in the series in dependence of a signal (Id. at 7). Appellants contend that Yamamoto teaches the number and not the position of the LEDs is used to determine how many LEDs are short-circuited and thereby turned off (Id.). Appellants contend that Yamamoto' s comparators 203 do not receive a signal such that the response to which turns the LEDs on or off. (Id.) The Examiner's findings and conclusions regarding Pickholz and Yamamoto are located on pages 3 to 4 and 7 to 8 of the Answer. Claim 1 recites, in relevant part, "several LED fields, each LED field comprising at least one LED, wherein the LED fields are connected in series by the driving electronics and the driving electronics is adapted to switch on and off each LED field according to its position in the series in dependence of a signal" (emphasis added). The Specification discloses that depending on the amount of the signal more or less LED fields may be operated at the same time, wherein the LED fields are switched on or off corresponding to its position in the series (Spec. 2:26-28). The Specification further discloses that each LED field transistor is allocated for switching fully or partially on and off the allocated LED field by the transistor that changes the LED status in dependence of the signal (Id. at 2:31-33). Each transistor is coupled with a comparator where each comparator is adapted to compare the signal with a 3 Appeal2014-009848 Application 13/124,911 different voltage threshold, wherein the amount of the voltage threshold corresponds to the position of the specific LED field in the series (Spec. 2: 34--3 6; 3: 1 ). Resistors in the reference voltage line (Vret) create differences in the reference voltage that is sent to each comparator thereby changing the threshold voltage for turning on or off the LED at a particular position (Id. at 3: 1--4 ). Appellants exemplify embodiments where the V signal voltage is compared to the Vref voltages and if V signal fails to satisfy the particular inequality for the Vref voltage assigned to the particular comparator of the LED, then the LED is not turned on (Id. at 7:5-14). Based upon these findings, we construe the disputed claim language as structurally requiring comparators coupled to a reference voltage line having resistors therein that produces different threshold reference voltages indicative of a LED position for each comparator. Yamamoto discloses that the reference voltage (Vret) line contains resistors (202) that produce different reference voltages that are sent to each comparator 203 (i-fi-f 51, 52). Yamamoto discloses that the section 200 includes a LED lighting control circuit which operates "to selectively control lighting or short-circuit of each LED in the LED array 103 in response to the magnitude of the voltage at the terminal V sENsE" (V d) (i-f 48). Yamamoto teaches that when Vd is greater than the Vref threshold of one comparator but less than the Vref threshold of another comparator, the LED assigned to that comparator is turned on (i-f 60-62). Yamamoto teaches that the LEDs may be turned on one at time so that 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 of the LEDs in the example may be turned on based upon the comparison of V d to the Vref voltage assigned to each comparator. (Id.) 4 Appeal2014-009848 Application 13/124,911 Yamamoto teaches the same structure of the device recited in claim 1 that enables the LED to be turned on or off according to the position of the LED assigned to the particular comparator having an assigned Vref value. Accordingly, we find that Yamamoto teaches a LED light where LEDs are turned on or off based upon the position of the LED within the meaning of the claims. Appellants' arguments to the contrary are not persuasive. On this record, we affirm the Examiner's§ 103 rejection. DECISION The Examiner's decision is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l). ORDER AFFIRMED 5 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation