Ex Parte Koolen

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 21, 2016

12989822 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 21, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/989,822 10/27/2010
119997 7590
Michael C Stephens, Jr,
22779 Montrose Court
Los Gatos, CA 95033
09/23/2016
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Gert-Jan Koolen
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.
SILG2016N02US 3108
EXAMINER
YANG, AMYX
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2844
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/23/2016 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):
mike@stephenspatents.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE
THE PA TENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte GERT-JAN KOOLEN1
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
Technology Center 2800
Before MARK NAGUMO, N. WHITNEY WILSON, and
BRIAND. RANGE, Administrative Patent Judges.
NAGUMO, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Gert-Jan Koolen ("Koolen") timely appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a)
from the Final Rejection2 of claims 1-7 and 9-20, which are all of the
pending claims. We have jurisdiction. 35 U.S.C. § 6. We affirm.
1 The real party in interest is identified as NXP B.V. (Appeal Brief,
filed 25 July 2014 ("Br."), 1.)
2 Office action mailed 29 April 2014 ("Final Rejection"; cited as "FR").
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
A. Introduction3
OPINION
The subject matter on appeal relates to a driving circuit for LED
lighting that provides a dimming curve for the LED lighting that has an
exponential shape like that of an incandescent lamp, rather than the linear
dimming curve characteristic of LEDs driven by conventional constant
current drivers. The '822 Specification explains that an incandescent bulb
controlled by a phase-cut dimmer, operating in a pulse width modulation
(PWM) mode, does not have a constant light output throughout the 60 Hz
phase provided by the AC mains. As shown in Figure 1, below,
0 0.2 04 06 0.8
{Figure 1 shows dimmer curves for incandescent ( +) and LED ( •) lighting
against dimmer knob settting}
3 Application 12/989,822, Dim range enhancement for LED driver
connected to phase-cut dimmer, filed 27 October 2010 as the national stage
of PCT/IB2009/051760, filed 30 April 2009, claiming the benefit of an
application filed 7 May 2008 in the EPO. We refer to the
'"822 Specification," which we cite as "Spec."
2
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
the response of an incandescent lamp at dimmer settings below about 0.6 is
exponential. The eye, however, is said to respond logarithmically to
changes in light intensity, such that we perceive the exponential response of
the incandescent light as linear. (Spec. 2, 11. 3-5.) For the same reason, we
perceive the linear response of the LED as non-linear. An object of the
invention is to provide a driver 1004 for LED lighting that provides "a
dimming curve more compatible with the physiological sensitivity of the
human eye." (Id. at 11. 11-13.) Such a driver is shown in the block diagram
of Figure 5, below.
"'""""""""""""""""... : :~"""""""""""""""""~ _J 10 ! • i ..,.., !,......... _____ _..,
[__:_J • L .. '.'.'.:_j I .
r"""~"~"""~ ~"""::~~'""! 1 r"""~'~~"""~
! ...... ~~--...! l. ..... ~.l~ ____ .i . L .... ~~J _____ j
100
{Figure 5 shows a block diagram of an LED driving circuit}
Phase-cut dimmer 10 operates by cutting out or "chopping" a portion
of each half-cycle of the 60 Hz AC power. (See, e.g., Shteynberg5 Figure 4,
reproduced on the following page, showing the phase modulated output
voltage from a standard dimmer switch (Shteynberg 4 [0032].)
4 Throughout this Opinion, for clarity, labels to elements are presented in
bold font, regardless of their presentation in the original document.
5 Full cite infra at 5 n. 7.
3
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
{Shteynberg Figure 4 is shown below}
a
)
{Shteynberg Figure 4 shows the phase modulated ("chopped") output
voltage from a standard dimmer switch; firing angle a= 0 corresponds to
full power; a = 180 corresponds to no power delivered to the lamp}
The resulting chopped signal is rectified (made all positive) by rectifier 22,
and the rectified signal powers driver 26. The average voltage of the
chopped rectified signal is detected by sensor 24, which provides a control
signal to driver 26, so the power sent to LEDs 30 is controlled appropriately.
Claim 1 is representative and reads:
A driving circuit [100] configured to drive a LED light
source [30], said driving circuit comprising:
a rectifier [22] configured to rectify a signal supplied by a
phase-cut dimmer [10];
a sensor [24] configured to detect an average voltage of
the rectified signal; and
a switched mode power supply [26] configured to drive
said LED light source
based on a signal that is output by said sensor [24],
said signal having a voltage level proportional to said
detected average voltage and
said switched mode power supply [26] being power-
supplied by the rectified signal,
4
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
wherein said LED light source has a non-linear dimming
curve and the detected average voltage is proportional to a
dimmer knob level.
(Claims App., Br. 11; some indentation, paragraphing, emphasis, and
bracketed labels to elements shown in Figure 5 (shown supra) added.)
The Examiner maintains the following ground of rejection6 :
Claims 1-7 and 9-20 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of the combined teachings of
Shteynberg, 7 Kriparos, 8 and Thrasher. 9
B. Discussion
Findings of fact throughout this Opinion are supported by a
preponderance of the evidence of record.
The Examiner finds that Shteynberg describes, in Figure 7, shown on
the following page, a driving circuit for LEDs that includes all elements
required by the claims but for specifying that: (a) LED light source [140] has
a non-linear dimming curve; (b) that sensor [165] detects the average voltage
of the rectified AC signal; and ( c) that dimmer switch 75 comprises a
dimmer knob. (FR 4-5.)
6 Examiner's Answer mailed 5 December 2014 ("Ans.").
7 Anatoly Shteynberg and Harry Rodriguez, Current regulator for
modulating brightness levels of solid state lighting, U.S. Patent Application
Publication 2007/0182338 Al (2007).
8 Daniel J. Kriparos, Electrical control for an LED light source, including
dimming control, U.S. Patent No. 6,683,419 (2004).
9 Larry E. Thrasher et al., Lighting system, apparatus, and method, U.S.
Patent No. 6,174,067 Bl (2001).
5
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
{Shteynberg Figure 7, is reproduced below}
2-00 ma
r-------------------------·--·-----.)~'"--------------=··-i
i 160 ~
i ~-_-.................................. l
i ! CQNTffiXLEA FS
I ; tG5 ~ ; ..-------J )
,.....__:.,..~ V. l "'" ~-~~~~,,
! ~ ~ ~ :~~~ ~ ~ • : CONTROL :
' '"v"'···-~ : mm;
L. ' ' r----------- - "'""[''At. uu •· '
! '1,·. ' fllm_.!~. -1"'. '-·---·t--···-' I t,.,,.."' "-'"" ~""'- .J \..
~- 203 170 F - - - "" • '>
: 155 ~- ~~~~~y- .:
' ' ' : .75
I
2:M
202 100
S-WHCHlNG
POWER
SUPPLY
I; . ___ __ ........+-, --1 j ::
I • : ~ o
: : ~ J ~ I ! :
rHO
I I i 110 120 15.Q ; "
[~~iJ~ij- ------ - - -- __ _J i~IW
L 7- --------,
95
{Fig. 7: dimmer switch 75 with current regulator 200, driving LEDs 140}
More particularly, the Examiner finds (FR 4), that Shteynberg shows
dimmer switch 75 connected to AC mains 35. The output of dimmer
switch 75 is rectified by rectifier 110, and impedance-matched by unit 120 to
switching power supply 150, which drives LEDs 140. In Shteynberg's
words, "[t]he RMS and nominal voltage sensors 165, 170 (and/or
memory 155) are utilized to provide emulation of the optical performance of
an incandescent lamp 95." (Shteynberg 5 [0049].)
The Examiner finds that Kriparos illustrates that the linear LED
versus nonlinear incandescent bulb problem is known in the art, and that it is
known to correct the response of the LED so "[t]he LED light source mimics
6
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
an operation of an incandescent light source with respect to a dimming
control" (Kriparos, Abstract, 2d sentence).
The Examiner finds further that Thrasher shows that it is known to
sense either the output of the dimmer switch directly or the rectified output.
(FR 4, last para., citing Thrasher, col. 13, 11. 53-57, which reads, "[o]ne of
ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that linear-load circuit 250 can sense
AC signal 204 directly or indirectly, for example, by sensing first rectified
signal 208 or second rectified signal 209" (italic emphasis added).)
Koolen urges that the Examiner fails to provide any articulated
reasoning supporting application of Thrasher's teachings to Shteynberg.
(Br. 5, 2d para.) Although rather terse, read in the context of Thrasher, we
are not persuaded of harmful error in this aspect of the rejection. Thrasher,
at column 13, describes the response of an electronic isolation transformer
shown in Figure 4 (not reproduced here) to input AC signal 204. Thrasher
teaches that "AC signal 204 can be ... an output signal of a dimmer switch."
(Thrasher, col. 10, 11. 50-52.) Thus, Thrasher's AC signal 204 corresponds,
in certain embodiments, to the output of Shteynberg's dimmer switch 75.
Shteynberg compares the output of dimmer switch 75 to the un-dimmed AC
signal and controls the output of switching power supply 150, which is
driven by the rectified dimmer switch output, to power the LED lamps.
Thus, Thrasher's teaching that either the output of the dimmer switch or the
rectified output of the dimmer switch can be used for control purposes
would have suggested that the rectified output of Shteynberg' s dimmer 75
could be measured and used for the same purposes as the modulated but
unrectified output.
7
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
The Examiner finds further that Thrasher teaches that dimmer
switches "typically have a rotatable knob that adjusts the intensity of the
lights" (Thrasher, col. 3, 11. 35-36). Koolen urges that "Thrasher fails to
disclose a dimmer knob circuit configured to drive a LED light source."
(Br. 5, last para.) Koolen urges further that Thrasher's knob is not
compatible with Shteynberg's dimmer switch 75, which "operates in the
context of solid state lighting, wherein it performs the function of 'regulating
brightness by phase modulation of the input AC voltage."' (Br. 7, 11. 2-5.)
These arguments are not persuasive of harmful error. Thrasher
teaches that "MO [manually operated] dimmer switches are installed on the
power line leading to the light, and typically have a rotatable knob that
adjusts the intensity of the lights." (Thrasher col. 3, 11. 35-37.) This is the
same position occupied by Shteynberg dimmer switch 75, and the same
function of switch 75. One of the objectives of Shteynberg (as well as of
the '822 Specification) is to provide driving circuits that allow presently-
used dimmer switches to be used with LED bulbs as well as with
incandescent bulbs. (Shteynberg 5 [0049].)
Koolen argues that "Thrasher's teachings of using a manually
operable dimmer switch would render Shteynberg unsatisfactory for its
intended purpose because Shteynberg' s dimmer switch needs to act as a
phase modulator." (Br. 7, 11. 5-7.) Kool en appears to conflate the function
of Thrasher's "manually operated" ("MO") dimmer switch with the entire
driver circuit. Shteynberg does teach that "current regulator 100 is
compatible with existing lighting infrastructure, and may be coupled directly
to a dimmer switch 75 for receiving a phase-modulated AC voltage derived
from the AC line voltage (AC mains)." (Shteynberg 5 [0045].) The phase
8
Appeal2015-003531
Application 12/989,822
modulated voltage from a standard dimmer switch is shown supra in
Shteynberg Figure 4. Koolen has not directed our attention to any credible
evidence that the standard dimmer switch differs in any substantial way from
the dimmer switch mentioned by Thrasher. For essentially the same reasons,
we find no persuasive merit in Koolen's arguments that Thrasher's MO
switch is incompatible with Shteynberg because "it must be installed directly
on a power line" and because "[i]t does not function by phase modulation"
(Br. 7, last para.)
Finally, Koolen criticizes the Examiner's reliance on Kriparos and
Thrasher. Kriparos, according to Koolen, teaches a specialized controller,
not a manually operable dimmer switch (Br. 8, 1st para.), so the teachings
are incompatible. These arguments are not persuasive because Kriparos
stands as evidence that the nonlinear behavior of incandescent lamps was
known, and further, that it was a known objective to provide drivers for LED
light sources that provide the desired nonlinear response to dimmer
control-an objective disclosed by Shteynberg, as discussed supra at 6.
C. Order
It is ORDERED that the rejection of claims 1-7 and 9-20 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § l.136(a).
AFFIRMED
9