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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments to claims 1, 2, 4 of 4/9/2026 acknowledged and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding p. 9, para. 3, applicant asserts that because examiner cites the hole 131 as the lens base, the amendment to include that the lens base be made of an existent material rather than a void would overcome the standing rejection. Rather, in the standing rejection, examiner was attempting to communicate that the distal end body 103, which incorporated the accommodating hole 131, could be considered to be a lens base as disclosed in the claim due to the presence of the accommodating hole. Hence, examiner is not convinced that the claim amendment would overcome the standing rejection, as the lens base as referred to is not the accommodation hole but the structure into which the hole is built.
Further, on p. 10, para. 3, applicant asserts that the groove 139a of Chung does not “protrude”. While that may be correct than an indentation cannot protrude, the fins that form the indent protrude relative to the groove surface. Hence, when considering the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, the grooves of Chung comprise a portion that protrudes from what could be considered the distal face of the lens base.
Finally, referring to p. 11, para. 1, applicant asserts that the light is not mounted on the mesa structure. However, para. [0040] of Chung discloses that the light source is mounted on distal end body 103, which is integral to the groove and fin structure 139a.
Hence, examiner is not convinced that the amendments nor the arguments overcome the standing rejection to Chung.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chung (US 20140142384 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chung teaches An electronic endoscope comprising
an image-capturing member (fig. 15, element 103, [0040], distal end body 103), the image-capturing member comprising:
a housing (fig. 15, element 103, [0040], distal end body 103);
a lens base (fig. 14, element 131, [0042], accommodating hole 131 accommodates the image sensor 111 and the light source 143) mounted in the housing and made of a metal or a non-metal material with thermal conductivity (the distal end body 103 is a non-void component, and thermal conductivity is a property of all objects), the lens base comprising
a base body and
at least one thermal-conductive mesa structure (fig. 14, element 139a, [0051], grooves 139, which have rectangular, V, or U shapes are convexly provided), the base body comprising a first side and a second side opposite to the first side, the thermal-conductive mesa structure protruding from a portion of the first side of the base body (all objects may be comprised of two opposing sides. The distal end body 103 has grooves disposed on a first distal side); and
a light source assembly comprising at least one light source mounted on the at least one thermal-conductive mesa structure (fig. 14, element 131, [0042], accommodating hole 131 accommodates the image sensor 111 and the light source 143, [0040], light source mounted to distal end body with integral heat dissipation grooves),
the at least one thermal-conductive mesa structure being configured to transfer heat generated by the at least one light source to the base body ([0051], heat fins increase contact area with cooling medium).
Regarding claim 2, Chung teaches The electronic endoscope of claim 1,
wherein the lens base is integrally formed (product by process. Any device may be formed integrally then separated for ease of part replacement), each of the at least one thermal-conductive mesa structure comprises a base plate (fig. 14, element 103, distal end body 103 housing mounts the grooves) connected to the base body, a fixing slot (fig. 14, element 131, [0042] accommodating hole 131 is a slot concave to the base plate wherein the light source and imager are mounted) is defined on the base plate, the base plate is recessed from a side further from the lens base toward the lens base to define the fixing slot, and the fixing slot is configured to mount the at least one light source.
Regarding claim 3, Chung teaches The electronic endoscope of claim 1,
wherein the image-capturing member further comprises at least one image sensor ([0042], image sensor 111),
the base body is recessed from a side further from the at least one thermal-conductive mesa structure toward the at least one thermal-conductive mesa structure to define at least one mounting slot (fig. 14, element 131, [0042] accommodating hole 131 is a slot concave to the base plate wherein the light source and imager are mounted), and
the at least one mounting slot is configured to accommodate the at least one image sensor (fig. 14, element 131, [0042] accommodating hole 131 is a slot concave to the base plate wherein the light source and imager are mounted).
Regarding claim 4, Chung teaches The electronic endoscope of claim 3,
wherein the light source assembly further comprises at least one lens ([0006], a lens may be mounted on the front portion of the endoscope) mounted on the base body, the base body defines at least one first mounting hole (fig. 14, element 131, [0042] accommodating hole 131 is a slot concave to the base plate wherein the light source and imager are mounted) configured to accommodate the at least one lens, the at least one first mounting hole passes through the first side and the second side, and the at least one mounting slot communicates with the at least one first mounting hole (fig. 14, element 131, [0042] accommodating hole 131 is a slot concave to the base plate wherein the light source and imager are mounted).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung as applied to claim4 above, and further in view of 송원국 (KR 101811759 B1).
Regarding claim 5, Chung teaches The electronic endoscope of claim 4,
Chung does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one image sensor comprises a first image sensor and a second image sensor, the at least one mounting slot comprises a first mounting slot configured to accommodate the first image sensor and a second mounting slot configured to accommodate the second image sensor; the at least one first mounting hole comprises two first mounting holes, the image-capturing member further comprises a first lens and a second lens, the first lens and the second lens are configured to be mounted in the two first mounting holes respectively; and the first image sensor and the second image sensor are configured to be mounted in the first mounting slot and the second mounting slot respectively, such that a distance between the first lens and the first image sensor is equal to a distance between the second lens and the second image sensor.
However, 송원국 teaches wherein the at least one image sensor comprises a first image sensor (fig. 17, element 232a, p. 11, para. 11, first camera 232a) and a second image sensor (fig. 17, element 232b, p. 11, para. 11, second camera 232b), the at least one mounting slot comprises a first mounting slot (fig. 17, element 251’, p. 12, para. 3, camera guide part 251’) configured to accommodate the first image sensor and a second mounting slot (fig. 17, element 251’, p. 12, para. 3, camera guide part 251’) configured to accommodate the second image sensor; the at least one first mounting hole comprises two first mounting holes, the image-capturing member further comprises a first lens and a second lens (p. 2, para. 7, objective lenses disposed at the end of each imaging system), the first lens and the second lens are configured to be mounted in the two first mounting holes respectively; and the first image sensor and the second image sensor are configured to be mounted in the first mounting slot and the second mounting slot respectively, such that a distance between the first lens and the first image sensor is equal to a distance between the second lens and the second image sensor (fig. 17, symmetrical holding components).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the imager of Chung to include a second imager as taught in 송원국 in order to increase the viewing range using multiple fixed cameras (송원국 p. 11, para. 11)
Regarding claim 6, Chung in view of 송원국 teaches The electronic endoscope of claim 5,
Further, Chung teaches wherein the image-capturing member further comprises a PCB (fig. 1, element 141, [0046], printed circuit board 141) provided in the housing, the base body extends from an edge of the second side toward a direction away from the first side to form a first extending portion, the PCB is provided with an abutting surface adapted to the first extending portion, and the first extending portion is configured to contact the abutting surface.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY TUAN LUU whose telephone number is (703)756-4592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday, Thursday-Friday.
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, Michael Carey can be reached at 5712707235. 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.
/TIMOTHY TUAN LUU/ Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights