IN THE
`UNITED ST ATES
`PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`IN RE APPLICATION OF: MISKIN
`L YN-07 13 l 7DV02
`
`CASE:
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.:
`
`2439
`
`SERIAL NO.:
`
`FILING DATE:
`
`FOR:
`
`13/450,938
`
`April 19, 2012
`
`LED CIRCUITS AND
`ASSEMBLIES
`
`Mail Stop Missing Parts
`COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 223 J 3-1450
`
`Dear Examiner Tran:
`
`RESPONSE TO
`OFFICE ACTION
`MAILED
`OCTOBER 25, 2013
`
`ATTENTION OF:
`Art Unit 2844
`EXAMINER :
`TRAN, Anh Q.
`
`This reply is in response to the Office Action dated October 25, 2013. Applicant includes
`herewith a petition for a three-month extension of time and payment for the same. Applicant
`
`respectfully traverses the rejection and as.ks for reconsideration of the same in view of the
`
`following remarks:
`
`Amendments to the Claims begin on page 2 of this paper.
`
`Remarks/Arguments being on page 3 of this paper.
`
`FACTOR INT ELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
`GROUP, LTD.
`1327 W. Washington Blvd., Suite SG/H
`Chicago, lJlinois 60607
`Tel: (312) 226-1818
`Fax: (312) 226-1919
`
`Jody L. Factor
`
`34157
`
`IPR PAGE 1
`
`Acuity v. Lynk
`Acuity Ex.
`
`1017
`
`

`
`Application No. 13/450,938
`Response to Office Action dated October 25, 2013
`
`Amendments to the Claims
`
`This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, of claims in the application:
`
`Listing of Claims:
`
`I.
`
`(original)
`
`An AC-driven LED assembly comprising:
`
`at least a first and a second LED each discretely packaged, the LEDs being connected in
`
`an AC circuit and each LED package being mounted to a substrate at a distance from the other of
`
`preferably approximately 3 mm or less, and more preferably 2.0 mm or less.
`
`2.
`
`(original)
`
`The AC-driven LED assembly according to claim 1 wherein the packaged
`
`LEDs each have a length of preferably approximately 2.5 mm or less, and more preferably 2.0
`
`mm or less.
`
`3.
`
`(original)
`
`The AC-driven LED assembly according to claim 1 wherein the packaged
`
`LEDs each have a width of preferably approximately 2.5 mm or less, and more preferably 2.0
`
`mm or less.
`
`4.
`
`(original)
`
`The AC-driven LED assembly according to claim 1 wherein the LED
`
`packages are arranged with respect to each other in a linear spatial relationship.
`
`5.
`
`(original)
`
`The AC-driven LED assembly according to claim 1 wherein the LED
`
`packages are arranged with respect to each other in an XY rectilinear spatial relationship.
`
`Page 2 of 5
`
`IPR PAGE 2
`
`

`
`Application No. 13/450,938
`Response to Office Action dated October 25, 2013
`
`REMARKS
`
`This reply is in response to the Office Action mailed on October 25, 2013.
`
`Reconsideration of the application-at-issue is respectfully requested.
`
`In the Office Action:
`
`•
`
`Claims 1-5 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2007/0069663 to Burdalski et al. ("Burda/ski") in
`
`view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2006/0103913 to Handschy ("Handschy") .
`
`By this reply no claims have been amended, cancelled, or added. As such, claims 1-5
`
`remain pending in the application.
`
`Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
`
`In the Office Action, independent claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Burdalski in view of Handschy. It is asserted that Burda/ski discloses an AC(cid:173)
`
`driven LED assembly comprising at least a first and second LED each discretely packaged (see
`
`fig. 13 and ~[0048], but fails to disclose each LED package being mounted to a substrate at a
`
`distance from the other preferably approximately 3mm or less, and more preferably 2mm or less.
`
`In order to compensate for Burdalski 's failings, the Office Action looks to Handaschy.
`
`Applicant respectfully submits that fig. 13 and~ [0048] of Burda/ski do not disclose a
`
`first and second LED, each discretely packaged. The only reference to a package within~ [0048]
`
`of Burda/ski states "the current limiting elements are inherent to the LED bridge rectifier I 02
`
`and are included in the same package." LED bridge rectifier 102 is identified in fig. 13 as
`including all of the LEDs in the circuit, i.e. LEDs Dl-D6. If the current limiting elements are
`
`inherent to the bridge rectifier, i.e. all of the LEDs in the circuit, and are included in the same
`
`package, then fig. 13 shows a single package having multiple LEDs, not multiple LEDs which
`
`are discretely packaged, as required by claim 1.
`
`Furthermore, Applicant respectfully submits that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`would not look to Handschy to compensate for Burdalski 's failing to arrive at the present
`
`invention as Handschy is unconcerned with the problem of flicker.
`
`As is known by those having ordinary skill in the art, LEDs that are driven by AC power
`
`"flicker" as the provided AC power cycles from positive to negative. Burdalski discusses this
`
`Page 3 of 5
`
`IPR PAGE 3
`
`

`
`Application No. 13/450,938
`Response to Office Action dated October 25, 2013
`
`issue in terms of pulsation which occurs when solid state lighting elements are powered directly
`by AC power. See, for e.g. , Burdalski at iii! [0007], [0008].
`In order to solve this issue, the discrete LED packages in the present invention are spaced
`
`a distance of 3mm or less is to eliminate the effect of flicker resulting from the use of AC power
`and LEDs. See iii! [0023 ], [0032] for example. By spacing the LEDs as required in claim 1, the
`effects of this flicker is greatly reduced as the LEDs turning on and off each half cycle are
`
`located a predetermined distance from each other.
`
`Handschy does not mention AC power frequency, AC powered LED circuits, or the
`problems associated with flicker in any manner. As described at if (0042] of Handschy, for
`example, the purpose of the spac.ing discussed in Handschy is to provide an image display where
`
`the pupil of a viewer's eye remains within imaging area when looking at the image.
`
`This is not a concern for lighting devices like those in Burdalsld as Burdalski provides
`
`solid state lighting and does not project images for viewing. There is no concern with the
`
`Burdalski device, for example, that an individual's pupil reaming within the imaging area when
`
`looking at the device because no image is discussed or projected. As such, a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the ai1 would not be interested in the spacing provided in Handschy for the purposes
`
`stated therein.
`
`Neither Handschy nor Burdalski teach, suggest, or provide any motivation to utilize the
`
`spacing in Handschy in order to reduce flicker caused by LEDs powered by AC power as
`
`discussed in Burdalski. The utilization of the Handschy in order to solve the problem presented
`
`in Burdalski and the present invention is only obvious through hindsight after viewing
`
`Applicant's invention.
`
`In view of the above, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 -as well as all claims
`
`ultimately dependent there from- are in condition for allowance and requests that this rejection
`
`be removed and all pending claims be allowed to issue.
`
`Page 4of5
`
`IPR PAGE 4
`
`

`
`Application No. 13/450,938
`Response to Office Action dated October 25, 20 13
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`Based on the foregoing, Applicant submits that all rejections should be removed and
`
`respectfully requests that all pending claims be allowed to issue.
`
`Applicant submits herewith a petition for a three-month extension ohime and payment
`
`for the associated fee. Applicant believes no other fees are required with this response, however,
`
`if any additional fees are required, the Commissioner is authorized to debit Deposit Account 50-
`
`0545.
`
`Should anything further be required, a telephone call to the undersigned at (312) 226-
`
`1818 is respectfully solicited.
`
`Dated: April 25, 2014
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Jody L. Factor/
`Jody L. Factor, Reg. No. 34157
`One of the Attorneys for the Applicant
`
`Page 5of5
`
`IPR PAGE 5