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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/079,185 filed on December 12, 2022 is presented for examination by the examiner. The amended claims submitted December 11, 2025 in response to the office action mailed September 11, 2025 are under consideration. Claims 1-33 are pending, all of which are either amended or new at least based upon the amendments to the independent claims 1, 17 and 24.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-11, 13-14, 16-23 and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee) in view of Arai et al. US 2022/0099922 A1 (hereafter Arai).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches “A camera module (camera module 10-1) comprising:
…a first optical axis (first optical axis C1); and
a reflective module (prism module 20-1 or 20-2) into which light … is incident (e.g. paragraph [0086]: “light incident along the first optical axis C1”), the reflective module comprising:
a housing (fixed body 220) having an internal space (see Figs. 9 and 17 and e.g. paragraph [0088]: “an inside of the fixed body 220 may form a space for receiving the first movable body 230”);
a rotatable holder (first movable body 230 or 230-1) supported in the housing (e.g. paragraph [0093]: “The first movable body 230 is configured to be disposed on the fixed body 220”) in a first direction parallel to the first optical axis (see Figs. 9 and 17 230 and 230-1 are supported on top of first ball bearings 272 and 274 in a direction parallel to C1), and configured to be rotatable relative to the housing (e.g. paragraph [0093]: “the first movable body 230 may be rotated around the ball bearing 272”);
a reflective holder (second movable body 240) supported in the rotatable holder in a second direction different from the first direction (240 is supported in a direction parallel to the second optical axis C2 via ball bearings 278, grooves 234 and protruding portions 242 see e.g. Fig. 13 and paragraph [0094]), and configured to be rotatable relative to the rotatable holder (e.g. paragraph [0096]: “The second movable body 240 may be rotatably disposed in the vertical direction on the first movable body 230”);
a reflective member (prism 210 with a reflective surface see e.g. paragraph [0105]) disposed on the reflective holder (e.g. paragraph [0097]: “The second movable body 240 may be configured to support the prism 210.”);
a first ball member (first ball bearing 272) forming a rotation axis of the rotatable holder (e.g. paragraph [0099]: “the first movable body 230 can be rotated clockwise or counterclockwise around the ball bearing 272, as shown in FIGS. 12A and 12B.”) and through which an imaginary line extending along the first optical axis passes (e.g. paragraph [0089]: “the center of the fixing groove 222 may be substantially coincident with the first optical axis C1 of the prism 210” see also paragraph [0069]); and
a driving magnet (second magnet member 262) and a driving coil (second coil member 264) configured to rotate the reflective holder (e.g. paragraphs [0101]: “the second magnet member 262 and the second coil member 264 may interact with each other, such that the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278”),
wherein the driving magnet and the driving coil face each other (262 and 264 face each other in the C2 direction, see Figs. 9 and 16) in a direction parallel to the second direction in which the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder (as noted above 240 is supported in a direction parallel to the second optical axis C2 via ball bearings 278, grooves 234 and protruding portions 242 see e.g. Fig. 13 and paragraph [0094]. This is the same direction as that which 262 and 264 face each other).”
However, Lee fails to teach “a first lens module comprising one or more lenses disposed along a first optical axis; and a reflective module into which light emitted from the first lens module is incident.” Note however, that the camera module in Fig. 1 of Lee is highly schematic and Lee teaches in paragraphs [0060]-[0061]: “The camera module 10 may be mounted to a portable electronic product. For example, the camera module 10 may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop, or the like… The camera module 10 includes, for example a prism module 20 and a lens module 30. However, the configuration of the camera module 10 is not limited to these modules.”
Arai teaches “A camera module (optical unit 1) comprising:
a first lens module (lens 101) comprising one or more lenses (lens 101) disposed along a first optical axis (incident direction D1); and
a reflective module (reflection unit 200) into which light emitted from the first lens module is incident (see Fig. 2 and paragraph [0033]: “The reflection unit 200 has a light flux to enter in the incident direction D1 from outside via the lens 101”), wherein the reflective module comprises:
a housing (fixed body 300) having an internal space (opening 310);
a rotatable holder (holder 20, which rotates see paragraph [0036]: “the reflection unit 200 can rotate with respect to the fixed body 300 with the X-axis direction as the rotation axis while supporting the prism 10.”) supported in the housing (see Fig. 3) and configured to be rotatable relative to the housing (paragraph [0036]: “the reflection unit 200 can rotate with respect to the fixed body 300 with the X-axis direction as the rotation axis while supporting the prism 10.”;
… a reflective member (prism 10) …
a first ball member (spherical body 41) forming a rotation axis of the rotatable holder (paragraph [0036]: “The spherical body 41 is engaged with a concave portion 34 of the spring member 30 fixed to the fixed body 300, and together with the concave portion 34 constitutes a rotation axis in the X-axis direction.”).”
Arai further teaches (paragraph [0031]): “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the smartphone 100 includes a lens 101 on which a light flux is incident. Inside the lens 101 of the smartphone 100, the optical unit 1 is provided. The smartphone 100 is configured to allow the light flux to be incident from the outside in the incident direction D1 via the lens 101, and to enable capturing of a subject image on the basis of the incident light flux.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a lens held in the outer casing of a smartphone, into which light from a subject image is incident and from which light is emitted towards the reflective module as taught by Arai in the camera module of Lee. One would have been motivated to make this addition in order to allow the light flux to be incident from the outside in the incident direction D1 via the lens 101, and to enable capturing of a subject image on the basis of the incident light flux as taught by Arai (paragraph [0031]) and because Lee discloses that the modules of their camera are not limited to only those depicted (Lee paragraph [0061]).
Regarding claim 2, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising a pair of magnetic bodies (magnet member 262 and yoke member 266 or paragraph [0095]: “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240 and a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”) configured to provide a magnetic force to support the reflective holder in the rotatable holder (paragraph [0100]: “The second yoke member 266 and the second magnet member 262 are configured to generate attractive force having a predetermined magnitude, even when no current is supplied to the second coil member 264.” Looking at Fig. 9, an attractive force between 262 and 266 is in the second direction supporting 240, or paragraph [0095]: “The first movable body 230 may be configured to directly or indirectly support a rear portion of the second movable body 240… for providing attractive force”),
wherein the pair of magnetic bodies comprises a first magnetic body (magnet member 262) disposed on the reflective holder (paragraph [0100]: “magnet member 262 may be disposed on a rear surface of the second movable body 240” or paragraph [0095] “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240”), and a second magnetic body (yoke 266, or paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”) is disposed on the rotatable holder (paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”) and
the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body face each other in the second direction (best seen in Fig. 16).”
However, Lee fails to explicitly simultaneously teach “another body of the pair of magnetic bodies is disposed on the rotating holder, and the pair of magnetic bodies face each other in the second direction” because yoke 266 is disposed on the housing, and although paragraph [0095] states that the yoke and magnet support a rear portion of the second movable body 240, Lee does not explicitly disclose the direction of this supportive attractive force.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the positions of the attractive yoke magnet pair of paragraph [0095] of Lee such that they face each other in the second direction as taught by yoke 266 and magnet 262 of Lee in order to configure the first movable body 230 to directly or indirectly support a rear portion of the second movable body 240 as taught by Lee (paragraph [0095]).
Regarding claim 3, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 2,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising a plurality of second ball members (third ball bearing 278, of which there are two) disposed between the reflective holder and the rotatable holder (278 and between 242 of 240 and 234 of 230) and forming a rotation axis of the reflective holder (paragraph [0094]: “third ball bearings 278 that function as rotary shaft”).”
Regarding claim 4, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 3,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising a plurality of accommodation grooves (grooves 234) formed in either one or both of the reflective holder and the rotatable holder (234 are formed in 230, see e.g. Fig. 13), wherein the plurality of second ball members are respectively disposed in the plurality of accommodation grooves (paragraph [0094]: “third ball bearings 278 that function as rotary shaft may be respectively disposed in grooves 234 of the left and right receiving portions 232”) in the second direction (see Fig. 13).”
Regarding claim 5, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 3,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the rotation axis of the reflective holder passes through the plurality of second ball members (paragraph [0094]: “third ball bearings 278 that function as rotary shaft”), and
the reflective member is disposed between the plurality of second ball members (see e.g. Fig. 13 where the surface of 240 on which the reflective surface of 210 will fit is beneath portions 242 in which the balls 278 reside and portions 242 are proximate to the non-optical sidewalls of 210).”
Regarding claim 6, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 2,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the driving magnet is disposed on the reflective holder (paragraph [0100]: “The second magnet member 262 may be disposed on a rear surface of the second movable body 240”) and the driving coil is disposed on the housing (paragraph [0092]: “the second coil member 264 of the second driving assembly 260 is disposed … on a rear surface of the fixed body 220.”), or the driving magnet is disposed on the housing and the driving coil is disposed on the reflective holder (this is optional).”
Regarding claim 7, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 6, wherein the reflective holder comprises an extension (see extension marked in the annotated version of Fig. 16 below) disposed between the rotatable holder and the housing (see the position of the extension marked in the annotated version of Fig. 16 below between the portion of the rotatable holder that directly supports the prism 210), the driving coil is disposed on the housing (paragraph [0092]: “the second coil member 264 of the second driving assembly 260 is disposed … on a rear surface of the fixed body 220.”), and
the driving magnet is disposed on the extension (see position of 262 on the extension marked in the annotated version of Fig. 16 below) facing the driving coil in the second direction (see Fig. 16, 262 and 266 face each other in the second direction).”
PNG
media_image1.png
382
730
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 2,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the driving magnet (262) is disposed between the driving coil and the first and second magnetic bodies (the pair of magnetic bodies of claim 2 were identified as those described in paragraph [0095] as being on the support portion 236 and 240, and thus are to the left of 262 in Fig. 16. Further the driving coil 264 is to the right of 262 in Fig. 16, thus 262 is disposed between the pair of magnetic bodies and the driving coil.).”
Regarding claim 11, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising:
a driving magnet (first magnet members 252, which are part of the first driving assembly 250) and a driving coil (first coil members 254, which are part of the first driving assembly 250) configured to rotate the rotatable holder (paragraph [0099]: “The first driving assembly 250 is configured to generate driving force required for a rotational operation of the first movable body 230”.); and
a magnetic body (yoke members 256) configured to provide a magnetic force by interacting with the driving magnet configured to rotate the rotate the rotatable holder (252 is configured to rotate 230 see paragraph [0099]) to support the rotatable holder in the housing (paragraph [0098]: “The first yoke members 256 are configured to generate a predetermined amount of attractive force with the first magnet members 252 even when no current is supplied to the first coil members 254.”),
wherein the magnetic body (256) and the driving magnet configured to rotate the rotatable holder (252 is configured to rotate 230 see paragraph [0099]) face each other in the first direction with the driving coil configured to rotate the rotatable holder (254 is configured to rotate 230 see paragraph [0099]) interposed therebetween (See e.g. Fig. 9 and Fig. 16 256 faces 252 in the C1 direction with 254 interposed therebetween.).”
Regarding claim 13, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 11,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising an accommodation groove (fixing groove 222) formed in either one or both of the housing and the rotatable holder (222 is formed on fixed body 200, see e.g. Figs. 7 and 9) and supporting the first ball member at three or more points (paragraph [0081]: “the fixing groove 222 may be formed to have a triangular shape to enable only rotation of the first ball bearing 272”. In order to prevent rolling in any direction the ball bearing 272 must be in contact with each of the three sides of 222, and thus 222 supports 272 at three points).”
Regarding claim 14, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 11,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising a plurality of guide ball members (second ball bearing 274 of which there are two) configured to guide a rotation of the rotatable holder (e.g. paragraph [0068]: “the first ball bearing 272 and the second ball bearing 274… enable smooth rotational movement of the prism 210 and the first movable body 230.”),
wherein the plurality of guide ball members are configured to be movable relative to the first ball member in a direction perpendicular to the first direction (paragraph [0081]: “the fixing groove 222 may be formed to have a triangular shape to enable only rotation of the first ball bearing 272, and the guide grooves 224 may have a curved shape having a predetermined height that enables orbital movement of the second ball bearings 274.” Thus 274 are movable relative to fixed ball 272. The orbital movement is in the plane of the bottom of 210 and thus perpendicular to the first direction that is normal to the plane of the bottom of 210).”
Regarding claim 16, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising a second lens module (lens module 30) into which the light emitted from the reflective member is incident (see e.g. Fig. 1), the second lens module comprising one or more lenses (paragraph [0065] “the lens module 30 may include one or more lenses”) disposed along a second optical axis (second optical axis C2), wherein the second optical axis is parallel to the second direction (see e.g. Figs. 8 and 9).”
Regarding claim 17, Lee teaches “A camera module (camera module 10-1) comprising:
… a second lens module (lens module 30) having different optical axes (first optical axis C1 is different than second optical axis C2); and
a reflective module (prism module 20-1 or 20-2) disposed on an optical path … to the second lens module (see e.g. Figs. 1 and 8), the reflective module comprising:
a housing (fixed body 220) having an internal space (see Figs. 9 and 17 and e.g. paragraph [0088]: “an inside of the fixed body 220 may form a space for receiving the first movable body 230”);
a rotatable holder (first movable body 230 or 230-1) disposed in the internal space of the housing (paragraph [0088]: “an inside of the fixed body 220 may form a space for receiving the first movable body 230”) and configured to be rotatable (e.g. paragraph [0093]: “the first movable body 230 may be rotated around the ball bearing 272”) about a first rotation axis (paragraph [0073]: “the first ball bearing 272 may be configured to be a center of rotation of the prism 210” and paragraph [0099]: “the first movable body 230 can be rotated clockwise or counterclockwise around the ball bearing 272, as shown in FIGS. 12A and 12B.”);
a reflective holder (second movable body 240) configured to be rotatable relative to the rotatable holder (e.g. paragraph [0096]: “The second movable body 240 may be rotatably disposed in the vertical direction on the first movable body 230”) about a second rotation axis (e.g. paragraph [0101]: “the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278, as shown in FIGS. 14A and 14B.”) perpendicular to the first rotation axis (see Figs. 9, 12A, 12B, 14A and 14B);
a reflective member (prism 210 with a reflective surface see e.g. paragraph [0105]) disposed on the reflective holder (e.g. paragraph [0097]: “The second movable body 240 may be configured to support the prism 210.”); and
a driving unit (second driving assembly 260) comprising a driving magnet (second magnet member 262) and a driving coil (second coil member 264) facing each other (262 and 264 face each other in the C2 direction, see Figs. 9 and 16) and configured to rotate the reflective holder (e.g. paragraphs [0101]: “the second magnet member 262 and the second coil member 264 may interact with each other, such that the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278”),
wherein the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder in a direction parallel to a direction in which the driving magnet and the driving coil face each other (240 is supported in a direction parallel to the second optical axis C2 via ball bearings 278, grooves 234 and protruding portions 242 see e.g. Fig. 13 and paragraph [0094]. This is the same direction as that which 262 and 264 face each other see Figs. 9 and 16).”
However, Lee fails to teach “a first lens module and a second lens module having different optical axes; a reflective module disposed on an optical path from the first lens module to the second lens module.” Note however, that the camera module in Fig. 1 of Lee is highly schematic and Lee teaches in paragraphs [0060]-[0061]: “The camera module 10 may be mounted to a portable electronic product. For example, the camera module 10 may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop, or the like… The camera module 10 includes, for example a prism module 20 and a lens module 30. However, the configuration of the camera module 10 is not limited to these modules.”
Arai teaches “A camera module (optical unit 1) comprising:
a first lens module (lens 101) and a second lens module (lens 102) having different optical axes (D1 and D2); and
a reflective module (reflection unit 200) disposed on an optical path from the first lens module to the second lens module (see Fig. 2), wherein the reflective module comprises:
a housing (fixed body 300) having an internal space (opening 310);
a rotatable holder (holder 20, which rotates see paragraph [0036]: “the reflection unit 200 can rotate with respect to the fixed body 300 with the X-axis direction as the rotation axis while supporting the prism 10.”) disposed in the internal space of the housing (see Fig. 3) and configured to be rotatable about a first rotation axis (paragraph [0036]: “the reflection unit 200 can rotate with respect to the fixed body 300 with the X-axis direction as the rotation axis while supporting the prism 10.”);
… and a reflective member (prism 10).”
Arai further teaches (paragraph [0031]): “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the smartphone 100 includes a lens 101 on which a light flux is incident. Inside the lens 101 of the smartphone 100, the optical unit 1 is provided. The smartphone 100 is configured to allow the light flux to be incident from the outside in the incident direction D1 via the lens 101, and to enable capturing of a subject image on the basis of the incident light flux.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a lens held in the outer casing of a smartphone, into which light from a subject image is incident and from which light is emitted towards the reflective module as taught by Arai in the camera module of Lee. One would have been motivated to make this addition in order to allow the light flux to be incident from the outside in the incident direction D1 via the lens 101, and to enable capturing of a subject image on the basis of the incident light flux as taught by Arai (paragraph [0031]) and because Lee discloses that the modules of their camera are not limited to only those depicted (Lee paragraph [0061]).
Regarding claim 18, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 17,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the rotatable holder is supported in the housing in a first direction parallel to the first rotation axis by a first magnetic force (paragraph [0098]: “The first yoke members 256 are configured to generate a predetermined amount of attractive force with the first magnet members 252 even when no current is supplied to the first coil members 254.”), and
the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction by a second magnetic force (paragraph [0100]: “The second yoke member 266 and the second magnet member 262 are configured to generate attractive force having a predetermined magnitude, even when no current is supplied to the second coil member 264.”).”
For future reference note that Lee also teaches “the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder in a second direction … by a second magnetic force (paragraph [0095]): “The first movable body 230 may be configured to directly or indirectly support a rear portion of the second movable body 240. … A magnet attached to the second movable body 240 and a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”).” However, the direction of attraction between this yoke-magnet pair is not explicitly disclosed.
Regarding claim 19, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 18, wherein the camera module further comprises:
a first driving magnet (first magnet members 252 which are driving magnets in that they are part of the first driving assembly 250) disposed on the rotatable holder (paragraph [0098]: “The first magnet members 252 may be disposed on the bottom surface of the first movable body 230”); and
a first pulling yoke (first yoke members 256) disposed on the housing (paragraph [0098]: “first yoke members 256 may be formed on the lower surface of the substrate member 280” see also Fig. 16), and
the first magnetic force is generated by the first driving magnet and the first pulling yoke (paragraph [0098]: “The first yoke members 256 are configured to generate a predetermined amount of attractive force with the first magnet members 252 even when no current is supplied to the first coil members 254”).”
Regarding claim 20, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 18,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the reflective module further comprises a pair of magnetic bodies (266 and 262) configured to generate the second magnetic force (paragraph [0100]: “The second yoke member 266 and the second magnet member 262 are configured to generate attractive force having a predetermined magnitude, even when no current is supplied to the second coil member 264”), and
configured to rotate together with the rotatable holder as the rotatable holder rotates (262 is disposed on 240, and 240 rotates together with 230 as 230 rotates).”
However, Lee fails to teach “the pair of magnetic bodies are configured to rotate together with the rotatable holder as the rotatable holder rotates.” because the yoke 266 is on the fixed body not the rotatable holder.
However, as noted in claim 18, Lee also teaches “the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder in a second direction … by a second magnetic force (paragraph [0095]): “The first movable body 230 may be configured to directly or indirectly support a rear portion of the second movable body 240. … A magnet attached to the second movable body 240 and a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”).”
This pair of magnetic bodies meets the limitation of claim 20: “wherein the reflective module further comprises a pair of magnetic bodies (paragraph [0095]: “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240 and a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”) configured to generate [a] second magnetic force (paragraph [0095]: “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240 and a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”), and
the pair of magnetic bodies are configured to rotate together with the rotatable holder as the rotatable holder rotates (paragraph [0095]: “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240 and a yoke or magnet … disposed on the supporting portion 236.” Thus the magnet and yoke are configured to rotate together with the rotatable holder).”
However, the direction of attraction between this yoke-magnet pair is not explicitly disclosed, and thus fails to explicitly meet (claim 18): “the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction by a second magnetic force” and (claim 20) “a pair of magnetic bodies configured to generate the second magnetic force.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the positions of the attractive yoke magnet pair of paragraph [0095] of Lee such that they face each other in the second direction as taught by yoke 266 and magnet 262 of Lee in order to configure the first movable body 230 to directly or indirectly support a rear portion of the second movable body 240 as taught by Lee (paragraph [0095]).
Regarding claim 21, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 20,” and the modification of Lee and Arai introduced for claim 20 further meets “wherein the pair of magnetic bodies comprise:
a first magnetic body disposed on the rotatable holder (paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236”); and
a second magnetic body disposed on the reflective holder (paragraph [0095]: “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240”) and facing the first magnetic body (they provide an attractive force and thus face one another) in the second direction (the direction in which they face one another is not specified in paragraph [0095], however the modification proposed in claim 20 was to adopt the configuration that they face each other in the second direction as taught by yoke 266 and magnet 262 of Lee).”
Regarding claim 22, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 21,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the first magnetic body is disposed between the driving magnet and the second magnetic body (in light of the indefiniteness issues raised above, this is considered to be met by Lee, where the first magnetic body is on 236 between the second driving magnet 262 to the left of 236 and the second magnetic body which is on 240 to the right of 236 as seen in Fig. 16).”
Regarding claim 23, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 22, wherein the first magnetic body is a pulling magnet (paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236”).” However, Lee does not explicitly disclose “and the second magnetic body is a second pulling yoke” because in paragraph [0095] the second magnetic body is a magnet.
However, Lee teaches that a magnetic body of the magnetically attractive pair can be either a yoke or a magnet (see paragraph [0095]).
Lee discloses the claimed invention except that a magnet is used for the second magnetic body instead of a yoke. Lee paragraph [0095] shows that a magnet and a yoke are equivalent structures in the art. Therefore, because these two magnetic bodies were art-recognized equivalents before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute a yoke for the magnet attached to the second movable body 240, and the results thereof would have been predictable. See MPEP §2144.06 and 2143 (I)(B).
Regarding claim 31, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 2,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the rotatable holder comprises: two side portions (receiving portions 232 that are exterior to support portions 236) spaced apart from each other in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction (232 are spaced apart from each other in a third direction along the rotary shaft of ball bearings 278); and a center portion (the central portion including support portions 236, the base on which 236 sit in Fig. 13 and the curved back wall in Fig. 13) parallel to the first direction (236 and the curved back wall are parallel to the C1 direction) and extending between the two side portions of the rotatable holder in the third direction (the central portion extends between the left and right receiving portions 232 in the third direction), and the second magnetic body is disposed on the center portion of the rotatable holder (yoke 266, or paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”).”
Regarding claim 32, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 21,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the rotatable holder comprises: two side portions (receiving portions 232 that are exterior to support portions 236) spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to the second rotation axis (232 are spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to the rotary shaft of ball bearings 278); and a center portion (the central portion including support portions 236, the base on which 236 sit in Fig. 13 and the curved back wall in Fig. 13) parallel to the first rotation axis (236 and the curved back wall are parallel to the C1 direction about which 240 rotates) and extending between the two side portions of the rotatable holder in the direction parallel to the second rotation axis (the central portion extends between the left and right receiving portions 232 in the direction parallel to the rotary shaft of 278), and the second magnetic body is disposed on the center portion of the rotatable holder (yoke 266, or paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”).”
Claims 8-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee) in view of Arai et al. US 2022/0099922 A1 (hereafter Arai) as applied to claims 7 and 11 above and further in view of Noji US 2006/0082674 A1 (hereafter Noji).
Regarding claim 8, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 7,” however, Lee fails to teach “further comprising a position sensor disposed on the housing and facing the driving magnet in the second direction.”
Noji teaches “a position sensor (24a, 24b, 24c paragraph [0033]: “magnetic sensors 24a, 24b, 24c, namely, position sensing means”) … facing the driving magnet (actuating magnets 22 where 24a faces 22, see e.g. Figs. 5-6 and paragraph [0047]).”
Noji further teaches (paragraph [0047]): “FIGS. 6 and 7 are diagrams illustrating relations of a displacement of the actuating magnet 22 and a signal generated from the magnetic sensor 24a. As shown in FIG. 6, when the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a is in the magnetic neutral axis C of the actuating magnet 22, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24 is at a level of naught. As the movable frame 14 is moved along with the actuating magnet 22 thereon to resultantly deviate the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a from the magnetic neutral axis, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24a varies. As shown in FIG. 6, when the actuating magnet 22 is moved in directions along the X-axis, namely, in the directions orthogonal to the magnetic neutral axis C, the magnetic sensor 24a produces a sinusoidal signal. Thus, when the displacement is minute, the magnetic sensor 24a generates a signal approximately in proportion to the displacement of the actuating magnet 22. In this embodiment, when the displacement of the actuating magnet 22 falls within a range less than 3% of the longer side of the actuating magnet 22, the signal output from the magnetic sensor 24a is approximately in proportion to the distance from the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a to the magnetic neutral axis C. Also, in this embodiment, the actuator 10 effectively works so far as the outputs from the magnetic sensors are approximately in proportion to the distance.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a position sensor facing the driving magnet as taught by Noji for the purpose of detecting the displacement in a manner where the output from the sensor is approximately proportional to the distance moved as taught by Noji.
Note that the limitation “a position sensor disposed on the housing and facing the driving magnet in the second direction” is considered to be met by the combination of references because Lee teaches that the driving coil (264) is disposed on the housing facing the driving magnet (262) in the second direction parallel to the optical axis C2 and Noji teaches a position sensor located inside the driving coil (see e.g. Fig. 5A). Thus taken in combination Lee and Noji teach “a position sensor disposed on the housing and facing the driving magnet in the second direction.”
Regarding claim 9, the Lee – Arai – Noji combination teaches “The camera module of claim 8,” however, Lee fails to teach “wherein the driving magnet is configured so that a surface of the driving magnet facing the driving coil has an N pole, a neutral region, and an S pole arranged in the first direction, and the position sensor faces the neutral region.”
Noji teaches “wherein the driving magnet is configured so that a surface of the driving magnet facing the driving coil has an N pole (Fig. 5 right lower region marked “N”), a neutral region (paragraph [0047]: “the magnetic neutral axis”), and an S pole (Fig. 5 left lower region marked “S”) … and the position sensor faces the neutral region (paragraph [0047]: “the magnetic sensor 24a is in the magnetic neutral axis C of the actuating magnet 22” and Figs. 5A, 5B and 6).”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a position sensor facing neutral region between the N and S poles of the driving magnet as taught by Noji for the purpose of detecting the displacement in a manner where the output from the sensor is approximately proportional to the distance moved as taught by Noji.
Note that the limitation “an N pole, a neutral region, and an S pole arranged in the first direction” is considered to be met by the combination of references, because the N and S poles of magnet 22 in Fig. 5A are arranged in a direction perpendicular to the direction in which the magnet and the coil face one another. Taken in the context of driving magnet 262 of Lee, this would dispose the N and S poles of 262 either parallel to the C1 direction, which is the first direction, or in a third direction perpendicular to both the C1 and C2 directions. This is a genus with only two species, and thus an ordinary skilled artisan would at once envisage limitation “an N pole, a neutral region, and an S pole arranged in the first direction.”1
Regarding claim 12, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 11,” however, Lee fails to teach “further comprising a position sensor facing the driving magnet configured to rotate the rotatable holder in the first direction.”
Noji teaches “a position sensor (24a, 24b, 24c paragraph [0033]: “magnetic sensors 24a, 24b, 24c, namely, position sensing means”) facing the driving magnet (actuating magnets 22 where 24a faces 22, see e.g. Figs. 5-6 and paragraph [0047]).”
Noji further teaches (paragraph [0047]): “FIGS. 6 and 7 are diagrams illustrating relations of a displacement of the actuating magnet 22 and a signal generated from the magnetic sensor 24a. As shown in FIG. 6, when the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a is in the magnetic neutral axis C of the actuating magnet 22, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24 is at a level of naught. As the movable frame 14 is moved along with the actuating magnet 22 thereon to resultantly deviate the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a from the magnetic neutral axis, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24a varies. As shown in FIG. 6, when the actuating magnet 22 is moved in directions along the X-axis, namely, in the directions orthogonal to the magnetic neutral axis C, the magnetic sensor 24a produces a sinusoidal signal. Thus, when the displacement is minute, the magnetic sensor 24a generates a signal approximately in proportion to the displacement of the actuating magnet 22. In this embodiment, when the displacement of the actuating magnet 22 falls within a range less than 3% of the longer side of the actuating magnet 22, the signal output from the magnetic sensor 24a is approximately in proportion to the distance from the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a to the magnetic neutral axis C. Also, in this embodiment, the actuator 10 effectively works so far as the outputs from the magnetic sensors are approximately in proportion to the distance.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a position sensor facing the driving magnet as taught by Noji for the purpose of detecting the displacement in a manner where the output from the sensor is approximately proportional to the distance moved as taught by Noji.
Note that the limitation “a position sensor facing the driving magnet in the first direction” is considered to be met by the combination of references because Lee teaches a coil (254) facing the driving magnet (252) in the first direction and Noji teaches a position sensor inside the coil that faces the magnet. Thus taken together Lee and Noji teaches “a position sensor facing the driving magnet in the first direction”.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee) in view of Arai et al. US 2022/0099922 A1 (hereafter Arai) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kwon et al. US 2020/0348479 A1 (hereafter Kwon).
Regarding claim 15, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” however, Lee fails to teach “further comprising a damper disposed on the reflective holder and protruding toward the first lens module.”
Kwon teaches a camera module having a reflective member that is rotatable in two directions.
Kwon further teaches “a damper (damper 1050) disposed on the reflective holder (see Figs. 11A and 12A, 1050 is disposed on the reflective holder in that it is on top of it, and in that damping members 1053 protrude toward and away from the rotating holder 1120) and protruding toward” the opening portion 1031 (1050 also protrudes upwards from 1120 toward the opening portion 1031 in the cover).”
Kwon further teaches (paragraphs [0107]-[0108]): “The damping members 1053 may serve as a damper for absorbing the shock of the rotating holder 1120 or a stopper for limiting the moving distance of the rotating holder 1120, and the third lens barrel 1230 may be fixed (FIG. 6B). In this case, the third lens barrel 1230 may serve to support one side of the damping members 1053 in the optical axis direction.
The damper 1050 may serve as brackets supporting the rotating holder 1120 when the reflection module 1100 is not being driven, and may serve as a damper or a stopper controlling movement of the rotating holder 1120 when the reflection module 1100 is being driven.”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a damper disposed on the reflective module and protruding upwards from the reflective module in the optical axis direction as taught by Kwon, for the purpose of absorbing the shock of the rotating holder and/or limiting the moving distance of the rotating holder as taught by Kwon (paragraphs [0107]-[0108]).
Note that the limitations “a damper … protruding toward the first lens module” are considered to be met by the combination of references because Arai teaches a first lens module on the subject side of the reflective member and Kwon teaches a damper which protrudes toward the subject side of the reflective member, and thus taken together the prior art teaches “a damper … protruding toward the first lens module.”
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee) in view of Arai et al. US 2022/0099922 A1 (hereafter Arai) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Shin et al. US 2022/0350108 A1 (hereafter Shin).
The applied reference, Shin, has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). Based on the publication date of Shin, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
The qualification of Shin as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
With regard to the qualification of Shin under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Regarding claim 15, the Lee – Arai combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” however, Lee fails to teach “further comprising a damper disposed on the reflective holder and protruding toward the first lens module.”
Shin teaches a camera module (camera module 10) with a rotatable reflective module (100) “further comprising a damper (damper holder 141 of e.g. Fig. 7) disposed on the reflective holder (paragraph [0089]: “The damper holder 141 may be coupled to the reflective holder 110”) and protruding toward (second damper 143 protrudes outward towards the subject).”
Shin further teaches (paragraph [0108]): “The second damper may be disposed on the damper holder to absorb the impact occurring in any of various directions.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a damper protruding from the incident surface of the reflective holder as taught by Shin, in order to absorb the impact occurring in various directions as taught by Shin (paragraph [0108]).
Note that the limitation “a damper… protruding toward the first lens module” is considered to be met by the combination of references, because Arai teaches a first lens module on the subject side of the reflective module, and Shin teaches a damper protruding towards the subject side from a location near the incident surface of the reflective member.
Claims 24-25, 29 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee).
Regarding claim 24, Lee teaches “A reflective module (prism module 20-1 or 20-2) comprising:
a rotatable holder (first movable body 230 or 230-1) configured to be rotatable (e.g. paragraph [0093]: “the first movable body 230 may be rotated around the ball bearing 272”) about a first axis (paragraph [0073]: “the first ball bearing 272 may be configured to be a center of rotation of the prism 210” and paragraph [0099]: “the first movable body 230 can be rotated clockwise or counterclockwise around the ball bearing 272, as shown in FIGS. 12A and 12B.”);
a reflective holder (second movable body 240) coupled to the rotatable holder (see ball bearings 278, receiving portions 232 and protruding portions 242) and configured to be rotatable about a second axis (e.g. paragraph [0101]: “the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278, as shown in FIGS. 14A and 14B.”) perpendicular to the first axis (see Figs. 9, 12A, 12B, 14A and 14B);
a reflective member (prism 210 with a reflective surface see e.g. paragraph [0105]) coupled to the reflective holder (e.g. paragraph [0097]: “The second movable body 240 may be configured to support the prism 210.”);
a first magnetic body (magnet member 262 or paragraph [0095]: “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240”) disposed on the reflective holder (paragraph [0100]: “magnet member 262 may be disposed on a rear surface of the second movable body 240” or paragraph [0095] “A magnet attached to the second movable body 240”);
a second magnetic body (yoke member 266 or paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”) disposed on the rotatable holder (paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”);
a driving magnet (second magnet member 262 which is also a driving magnet because it is part of the second driving assembly 260. Note that the claim does not require the driving magnet to be a different element than the first magnetic body.) disposed on the reflective holder (e.g. paragraph [0100]: “The second magnet member 262 may be disposed on a rear surface of the second movable body 240”); and
a driving coil (second coil member 264) configured to interact with the driving magnet (e.g. paragraphs [0101]: “the second magnet member 262 and the second coil member 264 may interact with each other, such that the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278”),
wherein the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body face each other in a direction parallel to a third axis (262 and 266 face each other in an axis parallel to C2),
the driving magnet and the driving coil face each other in a direction parallel to the third axis (262 and 264 face each other in the C2 direction, see Figs. 9 and 16)
and the third axis is perpendicular to both the first axis and the second axis (C2 is perpendicular to the two rotational axes as seen in Figs. 12A, 14A and 16).”
However, Lee fails to simultaneously teach “a second magnetic body disposed on the rotatable holder, wherein the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body face each other in a direction parallel to a third axis” because the magnet/yoke pair of paragraph [0095] has a magnetic body disposed on the first movable body 230, but does not explicitly disclose the direction in which this magnet/yoke pair faces each other, and yoke 266 is disposed on the fixed body, not the first movable body 230.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the positions of the attractive yoke magnet pair of paragraph [0095] of Lee such that they face each other in the third direction as taught by yoke 266 and magnet 262 of Lee in order to configure the first movable body 230 to directly or indirectly support a rear portion of the second movable body 240 as taught by Lee (paragraph [0095]).
Regarding claim 25, Lee teaches “The reflective module of claim 24,” however, Lee fails to explicitly teach “wherein the first magnetic body is disposed between the second axis and the second magnetic body.”
However, Lee paragraph [0095] teaches an attractive magnetic pair on 240 and 236. As shown in Fig. 16, the portion of 240 that is closest to 236 is the inclined rear surface of 240 that is parallel to the inclined upper surface of 236. Further the inclined rear surface of 240 is between the second axis (located at ball 278) and support portion 236.
It is a well-established proposition that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). MPEP §2144.04(VI)(C). The rearrangement in this case does not modify the operation of the device because placing the magnetic bodies at the surfaces of 240 and 236 that are closest to one another is the most logical place to put them. The benefits of this modification include minimizing the strength of the magnets needed to provide this support, and thus reduce the size and weight of these magnetic bodies.
Regarding claim 29, Lee teaches “The reflective module of claim 24, further comprising a ball member (third ball bearings 278) through which the second axis passes (e.g. paragraph [0101]: “the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278, as shown in FIGS. 14A and 14B.”), wherein the ball member is disposed between (see Fig. 16) a first accommodation groove formed in the rotatable holder (groove 234 in 230) and a second accommodation groove formed in the reflective holder (see groove in 242 that accommodates 278 in Fig. 16), and
the first accommodation groove and the second accommodation groove face each other (see Fig. 16) in a direction parallel to the third axis (234 and the groove in 242 face each other in a direction parallel to C2 which is the same direction that the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body face each other in the modification of Lee above for claim 24).”
Regarding claim 33, the Lee “The camera module of claim 24, wherein the rotatable holder comprises: two side portions (receiving portions 232 that are exterior to support portions 236) spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to the second axis (232 are spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to the rotary shaft of ball bearings 278); and a center portion (the central portion including support portions 236, the base on which 236 sit in Fig. 13 and the curved back wall in Fig. 13) parallel to the first axis (236 and the curved back wall are parallel to the C1 direction about which 240 rotates) and extending between the two side portions of the rotatable holder in the direction parallel to the second axis (the central portion extends between the left and right receiving portions 232 in the direction parallel to the rotary shaft of 278), and the second magnetic body is disposed on the center portion of the rotatable holder (yoke 266, or paragraph [0095]: “a yoke or magnet for providing attractive force may be disposed on the supporting portion 236.”).”
Claims 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee) as applied to claim 24 above and further in view of Noji US 2006/0082674 A1 (hereafter Noji).
Regarding claim 26, Lee teaches “The reflective module of claim 24.” However, Lee fails to teach “further comprising a position sensor configured to detect a movement of the driving magnet.”
Noji teaches “a position sensor (paragraph [0033]: “magnetic sensors 24a, 24b, 24c, namely, position sensing means”) configured to detect a movement of the driving magnet (paragraph [0047]: “As the movable frame 14 is moved along with the actuating magnet 22 thereon to resultantly deviate the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a from the magnetic neutral axis, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24a varies… the signal output from the magnetic sensor 24a is approximately in proportion to the distance from the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a to the magnetic neutral axis C.).”
Noji further teaches (paragraph [0047]): “FIGS. 6 and 7 are diagrams illustrating relations of a displacement of the actuating magnet 22 and a signal generated from the magnetic sensor 24a. As shown in FIG. 6, when the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a is in the magnetic neutral axis C of the actuating magnet 22, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24 is at a level of naught. As the movable frame 14 is moved along with the actuating magnet 22 thereon to resultantly deviate the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a from the magnetic neutral axis, the output signal from the magnetic sensor 24a varies. As shown in FIG. 6, when the actuating magnet 22 is moved in directions along the X-axis, namely, in the directions orthogonal to the magnetic neutral axis C, the magnetic sensor 24a produces a sinusoidal signal. Thus, when the displacement is minute, the magnetic sensor 24a generates a signal approximately in proportion to the displacement of the actuating magnet 22. In this embodiment, when the displacement of the actuating magnet 22 falls within a range less than 3% of the longer side of the actuating magnet 22, the signal output from the magnetic sensor 24a is approximately in proportion to the distance from the center of sensitivity S of the magnetic sensor 24a to the magnetic neutral axis C. Also, in this embodiment, the actuator 10 effectively works so far as the outputs from the magnetic sensors are approximately in proportion to the distance.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a position sensor facing the driving magnet as taught by Noji for the purpose of detecting the displacement in a manner where the output from the sensor is approximately proportional to the distance moved as taught by Noji.
Regarding claim 27, the Lee – Noji combination teaches “The reflective module of claim 26,” and Lee further teaches “wherein the first magnetic body, the second magnetic body, the driving magnet, … are disposed in a direction parallel to the third axis (in the modification introduced for claim 24 above, the two magnetic bodies of paragraph [0095] were made to face each other in a direction parallel to the third axis. Since these magnetic bodies are between 240 and 236 in Fig. 16, the driving magnet 262 is also disposed in a direction parallel to the third axis in relation to the magnetic bodies of paragraph [0095]).”
However, Lee fails to teach “the position sensor are disposed in a direction parallel to the third axis.”
Noji, as introduced for claim 26 above, teaches that the position sensor 24a is disposed inside the driving coil and facing the driving magnet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a position sensor facing the driving magnet as taught by Noji for the purpose of detecting the displacement in a manner where the output from the sensor is approximately proportional to the distance moved as taught by Noji.
Thus, taken together Lee and Noji teach “wherein the first magnetic body, the second magnetic body, the driving magnet, and the position sensor are disposed in a direction parallel to the third axis”.
Regarding claim 28, the Lee – Noji combination teaches “The reflective module of claim 26,” and Lee further teaches “further comprising a housing (fixed body 220) having an internal space (see Figs. 9 and 17 and e.g. paragraph [0088]: “an inside of the fixed body 220 may form a space for receiving the first movable body 230”) and an opening in the housing (cutout portion 229) exposing the internal space (see Fig. 9), wherein the rotatable holder is disposed in the housing (230 is disposed in 220); and
the driving coil (coil 264) … exposed to the internal space of the housing through the opening in the housing (e.g. paragraph [0092]: “a second cutout portion 229 in which the second coil member 264 of the second driving assembly 260 is disposed or exposed may be formed on a rear surface of the fixed body 220”).”
However, Lee fails to teach “the position sensor are exposed to the internal space of the housing.”
Noji, as introduced for claim 26 above, teaches that the position sensor 24a is disposed inside the driving coil.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a position sensor facing the driving magnet as taught by Noji for the purpose of detecting the displacement in a manner where the output from the sensor is approximately proportional to the distance moved as taught by Noji.
Taken together Lee and Noji teach “the driving coil and the position sensor are exposed to the internal space of the housing through the opening in the housing” because Lee teaches that the coil is exposed to the internal space of the housing through cutout portion 229, and Noji teaches the position sensor disposed in the coil.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 2021/0181460 A1 (hereafter Lee) as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Arai et al. US 2022/0099922 A1 (hereafter Arai).
Regarding claim 30, Lee teaches “A camera module (camera module 10-1) comprising:
the reflective module of claim 24 (see claim 24 above);
… a first optical axis (C1) parallel to the first axis (see e.g. Figs. 12A-12B); and
a second lens module (lens module 30) having a second optical axis (C2) parallel to the third axis (the direction that the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body face each other in the modification of Lee above for claim 24 is parallel to the optical axis C2).”
However, Lee fails to teach “a first lens module.” Note however, that the camera module in Fig. 1 of Lee is highly schematic and Lee teaches in paragraphs [0060]-[0061]: “The camera module 10 may be mounted to a portable electronic product. For example, the camera module 10 may be mounted on a mobile phone, laptop, or the like… The camera module 10 includes, for example a prism module 20 and a lens module 30. However, the configuration of the camera module 10 is not limited to these modules.”
Arai teaches “A camera module (optical unit 1) comprising:
a reflective module (reflection unit 200);
a first lens module (lens 101) having a first optical axis (D1)…
and a second lens module (lens 102) having a second optical axes (D2).”
Arai further teaches (paragraph [0031]): “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the smartphone 100 includes a lens 101 on which a light flux is incident. Inside the lens 101 of the smartphone 100, the optical unit 1 is provided. The smartphone 100 is configured to allow the light flux to be incident from the outside in the incident direction D1 via the lens 101, and to enable capturing of a subject image on the basis of the incident light flux.”
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a lens held in the outer casing of a smartphone, into which light from a subject image is incident and from which light is emitted towards the reflective module as taught by Arai in the camera module of Lee. One would have been motivated to make this addition in order to allow the light flux to be incident from the outside in the incident direction D1 via the lens 101, and to enable capturing of a subject image on the basis of the incident light flux as taught by Arai (paragraph [0031]) and because Lee discloses that the modules of their camera are not limited to only those depicted (Lee paragraph [0061]).
Note that the limitations “a first lens module having a first optical axis parallel to the first axis” are considered to be met by the combination of references because in Arai the first optical axis of the first lens module is also the first optical axis incident on the prism, and in Lee the first optical axis of the prism is also the rotation axis of the first movable body 230.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Under the heading “Independent Claim 1” on pages 9-10 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant submits that Lee and Arai do not disclose or suggest the features now recited in claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees with this assessment of the prior art. As noted in the rejection above, Lee in fact does teach:
a driving magnet (second magnet member 262) and a driving coil (second coil member 264) configured to rotate the reflective holder (e.g. paragraphs [0101]: “the second magnet member 262 and the second coil member 264 may interact with each other, such that the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278”),
wherein the driving magnet and the driving coil face each other (262 and 264 face each other in the C2 direction, see Figs. 9 and 16) in a direction parallel to the second direction in which the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder (as noted above 240 is supported in a direction parallel to the second optical axis C2 via ball bearings 278, grooves 234 and protruding portions 242 see e.g. Fig. 13 and paragraph [0094]. This is the same direction as that which 262 and 264 face each other).
Under the heading “Independent Claim 17” on pages 10-11 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant submits that Lee and Arai do not disclose or suggest the features now recited in claim 17. The examiner respectfully disagrees with this assessment of the prior art. As noted in the rejection above, Lee in fact does teach:
a driving unit (second driving assembly 260) comprising a driving magnet (second magnet member 262) and a driving coil (second coil member 264) facing each other (262 and 264 face each other in the C2 direction, see Figs. 9 and 16) and configured to rotate the reflective holder (e.g. paragraphs [0101]: “the second magnet member 262 and the second coil member 264 may interact with each other, such that the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278”),
wherein the reflective holder is supported in the rotatable holder in a direction parallel to a direction in which the driving magnet and the driving coil face each other (240 is supported in a direction parallel to the second optical axis C2 via ball bearings 278, grooves 234 and protruding portions 242 see e.g. Fig. 13 and paragraph [0094]. This is the same direction as that which 262 and 264 face each other see Figs. 9 and 16).
Under the heading “Conclusion-Rejection 1” on page 11 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant concludes that the rejections of claims 1-7, 10-11, 13-14 and 16-23 should be withdrawn based on the argued features of claims 1 and 17 above. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Rejection 2” on page 11 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that claims 8-9 and 12 are allowable for at least the same reasons discussed above for independent claim 1. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Rejection 3” on page 12 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that claim 15 is allowable for at least the same reasons discussed above for independent claim 1. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Rejection 4” on page 12 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that claim 15 is allowable for at least the same reasons discussed above for independent claim 1. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Rejection 5” on page 12 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant introduces that they will be arguing that the rejections claims 24-25 and 29 should be withdrawn.
Under the heading “Independent Claim 24” on page 13 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant submits that Lee does not disclose or suggest the features now recited in claim 24. The examiner respectfully disagrees with this assessment of the prior art. As noted in the rejection above, Lee in fact does teach:
a driving magnet (second magnet member 262 which is also a driving magnet because it is part of the second driving assembly 260. Note that the claim does not require the driving magnet to be a different element than the first magnetic body.) disposed on the reflective holder (e.g. paragraph [0100]: “The second magnet member 262 may be disposed on a rear surface of the second movable body 240”); and
a driving coil (second coil member 264) configured to interact with the driving magnet (e.g. paragraphs [0101]: “the second magnet member 262 and the second coil member 264 may interact with each other, such that the second movable body 240 may be rotated upwardly or downwardly around the third ball bearings 278”),
wherein the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body face each other in a direction parallel to a third axis (262 and 266 face each other in an axis parallel to C2),
the driving magnet and the driving coil face each other in a direction parallel to the third axis (262 and 264 face each other in the C2 direction, see Figs. 9 and 16)
and the third axis is perpendicular to both the first axis and the second axis (C2 is perpendicular to the two rotational axes as seen in Figs. 12A, 14A and 16).
Under the heading “Conclusion-Rejection 5” on page 13 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant concludes that the rejections of claims 24-25 and 29 should be withdrawn based on the argued features of claim 24 above. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Rejection 6” on pages 13-14 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that claims 26-28 are allowable for at least the same reasons discussed above for independent claim 24. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Rejection 7” on page 14 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that claim 30 is allowable for at least the same reasons discussed above for independent claim 24. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
Under the heading “Patentability of New Dependent Claims 31-33” in the paragraph spanning pages 14-15 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant submits that Lee fails to teach “a center portion parallel to the first direction and extending between the two side portions of the rotatable holder in the third direction, and the second magnetic body is disposed on the center portion of the rotatable holder.” and notes that support for the above features can be found in at least Fig. 8 of the present application. The examiner agrees that new claims 31-33 are supported by the application as filed. No specific argument with respect to the prior art is made in this paragraph.
From page 15 through the first paragraph of page 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the supporting portions 236 on which the second magnetic body is disposed do not constitute a center portion extending between the two side portions in the third direction because 236 are spaced apart from one another. This argument is not persuasive because nothing precludes interpreting the receiving portions 232 as being the side portions and identifying the supporting portions 236, the curved rear wall and the base of 230 together as being the center portion.
In the second paragraph of page 16 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the same reasoning applies to claims 32 and 33. This argument has been addressed above.
In the third paragraph of page 16 of 16 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that none of Arai, Noji, Kwon, or Shin disclose or suggest the features of claims 31-33. This argument is moot since none of these references is relied upon for the limitations in question.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CARA E RAKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-4206. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-4PM ET M-F.
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, Thomas Pham can be reached at 571-272-3689. 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.
/CARA E RAKOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
1 See MPEP § 2131.02(III). A reference disclosure can anticipate a claim when the reference describes the limitations but "'d[oes] not expressly spell out' the limitations as arranged or combined as in the claim, if a person of skill in the art, reading the reference, would ‘at once envisage’ the claimed arrangement or combination." Kennametal, Inc. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co., 780 F.3d 1376, 1381, 114 USPQ2d 1250, 1254 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (quoting In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 681(CCPA 1962)).