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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II in the reply filed on July 15, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 2-4 and 15-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 15, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Lines 3-4 of claim 11 recites: “…reversed at a position corresponding to the center of each coil.” It is recommended to be changed to read: “…reversed at a position corresponding to a center of each coil.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 5-14, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bai el al. (U.S. Publication No.: 2012/0076486), and further in view of Gong et al. (CN110703534).
Regarding claim 1:
Bai discloses a blade driving device (FIGS. 1-6) in which a central axis (FIG. 1, represented by the vertical line in the middle passing through the centers of the openings of (40)/(30)/(10)) is defined, comprising: a plurality of blades ((20), [0025]) arranged around the central axis (FIG. 4); and a plurality of groups each comprising a magnet (FIGS. 2-6, (31), [0026]) and a coil ((11), [0026]), and arranged at intervals along a circumference of a circle centered on the central axis (FIGS. 2-6), wherein a winding axis direction of the coil coincides with a normal direction of a facing surface of the magnet facing the coil (FIG. 3), when viewed from the winding axis direction, magnetic poles formed on the facing surface are reversed at a position corresponding to a center of the coil (FIG. 4, indicated below), each of the groups generates an electromagnetic force along a circumference direction of the circle to drive the blades ([0014, 0026]).
PNG
media_image1.png
576
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bai does not specifically disclose that each group comprises at least two coils.
Gong teaches a variable aperture device (FIGS. 1-6), comprising a group comprising a magnet (FIG. 5, (11), [0030]) and at least two coils (FIG. 4, (9), [0030]), wherein a winding axis direction of the coil coincides with a normal direction of a facing surface of the magnet facing the coil (FIGS. 3, 6), when viewed from the winding axis direction, magnetic poles formed on the facing surface are reversed at a position corresponding to a center of the coil (FIG. 3, indicated below), the group generates an electromagnetic force along a circumference direction of the circle to drive the blades ([0030, 0032, 0038, 0039]).
PNG
media_image2.png
482
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
540
584
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the feature of Gong’s with the blade driving device taught by Bai for the purpose of providing a continuously variable aperture device without affecting the thickness (Gong: [0004, 0031]).
Regarding claim 5:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 1, wherein Gong further discloses that when viewed from the central axis direction, two or more coils are linearly connected and aligned (FIGS. 3, 4, 6).
Regarding claim 6:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 1, wherein Gong further discloses that in an alignment direction of the coils, areas of portions magnetized to one magnetic pole at both ends of the magnet are smaller than areas of other portions magnetized to one magnetic pole (indicated below).
PNG
media_image4.png
472
514
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 1, wherein Gong further discloses that in an alignment direction of the coils, end portions of the magnet are located at positions corresponding to centers of the coils (indicated below).
PNG
media_image5.png
373
847
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 1, wherein Bai further discloses: a fixed portion (FIG. 1, (40)/(10), [0025]); and a movable ring ((30), [0025, 0043]) which is supported so as to be rotatable about the central axis with respect to the fixed portion and drives the blades by rotation (FIGS. 2-5, [0025, 0045, 0047]), wherein one of the coils and the magnets are arranged at the fixed portion (FIG. 1, (11) is arranged at (10), [0026]), and the other is arranged on the movable ring (FIG. 1, (31) is arranged at (30), [0026]).
Regarding claim 9:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 1, wherein Gong further discloses that a winding axis direction of the coil and a normal direction of a facing surface of the magnet facing the coil face a radial direction centered on the central axis as a whole (illustrated below).
PNG
media_image6.png
476
763
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 9, wherein Gong further discloses that when viewed from the central axis direction, the at least two coils are linearly connected and aligned (FIGS. 3, 4, 6), and the magnetic poles are reversed at a position corresponding to a center of each coil (indicated below).
PNG
media_image2.png
482
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
540
584
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of the blade driving device according to claim 9, wherein Gong further discloses that when viewed from the central axis direction, the at least two coils are connected and aligned along the circumference direction of the circle (FIGS. 3, 6), and the magnetic poles are reversed at a position corresponding to a center of each coil (indicated in claim 10 above).
Regarding claim 12:
Claim 12 is similarly rejected as in claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 13:
Claim 13 is similarly rejected as in claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 14:
Claim 17 is similarly rejected as in claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 19:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of a camera device comprising the blade driving device according to claim 1 (Bai: FIG. 7, “imaging elements inside the main unit 110”, [0076-0078]).
Regarding claim 20:
Bai and Gong disclose and teach of an electronic apparatus comprising the camera device according to claim 19 (Bai: FIG. 7, “surveillance camera” (100), [0076-0078]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANG-CHI CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5299. The examiner can normally be reached MRF 9am-5pm.
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, STEPHANIE BLOSS can be reached at 5712723555. 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.
/FANG-CHI CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852