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. 18/112,842 filed on February 22, 2023 is presented for examination by the examiner.
The amended claims submitted June 30, 2026 in response to the office action mailed April 3, 2026 are under consideration. Claims 1-16 are pending and amended at least by the amendments to independent claims 1 and 13.
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 § 112
The 35 USC §112(b) rejections of the previous office action have not been overcome by the amendments to the claims. The rejections below have been updated to reflect the additional issues that are raised by the amendments.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations:
(lines 3-4) “at least one lens arranged in a direction of an optical axis of the lens module”
(lines 5-6): “an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis”
(lines 9-10): “perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module”
(line 11): “the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident”
(lines 13-14): “an optical axis direction of the lens module”
(lines 14-15): “a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module”
These language choices render the claim indefinite for at least the following reasons.
First, “an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis” is only true in the instant application if “the direction of the optical axis” includes the direction of the optical axis after reflection by the reflective module, which is the X-axis direction that intersects the imaging surface located in an Y-Z plane. In light of this, the limitation in lines 3-4 “a direction of an optical axis of the lens module” must be construed as if it recited “one of [[a]] the directions of an optical axis of the lens module” corresponding to the Z-axis in the instant application, otherwise the recitations in lines 3-4 and 5-6 cannot simultaneously be true.
Second, “the optical axis of the lens module” is not the same thing as “the direction of the optical axis of the lens module during passage through the at least one lens”. This is an important distinction because the optical axis throughout the entirety of the path of the light incident on the camera module and imaged by the image sensor is “the optical axis of the lens module” because the optical axis of the lens module does not cease to exist when the path is folded by the reflective module.
Third, in light of point 1, “perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module” is indefinite because it does not specify whether the rotational axes must be perpendicular to the direction of the optical axis previously introduced.
Fourth, the introduction of “an optical axis direction of the lens module” in lines 13-14 further obfuscates the meaning of the claim because it appears to reintroduce the direction of the optical axis of the lens module, but uses the indefinite article “an” and does not conform the earlier word choices. Thus it is unclear how the directions of lines 13-15 should be interpreted.
If the examiner has correctly guessed the intended scope of claim 1, the examiner recommends the following amendment, that would overcome the above issues and stay best in keeping with the descriptions in the specification as filed, where the Z-axis direction was consistently associated with the optical axis direction through the lenses, and the X-axis direction was referred to as a first axis direction.
1. (proposed amendment) A camera module comprising:
a housing having an internal space;
a lens module, disposed in the internal space, including at least one lens arranged in a Z-axis direction of an optical axis of the lens module;
an image sensor, disposed in the housing, configured to have an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting [[the]] an X-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module; and
a reflective module, disposed in the internal space between the lens module and the image sensor, configured to reflect light passing through the lens module towards the image sensor and to tilt about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module, the reflective module being tiltably coupled to the housing,
wherein the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident,
and wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module and in a direction perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module.
Claims 2-12 depend from claim 1 and inherit and do not mitigate the above indefiniteness issue from claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, line 5, “the axis perpendicular to the optical axis as the rotational axis” is not consistent with what is now claimed in claim 1 of “to tilt about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module” which introduces two axes. Furthermore, line 10 “in the optical axis direction” is indefinite for all of the reasons explained for claim 1 above.
If the above proposed amendment for claim 1 is adopted, the examiner recommends amending claim 3 as follows:
3. (proposed amendment) The camera module of claim 1, wherein an optical image stabilization unit including an optical image stabilization magnet is disposed in the reflective module and an optical image stabilization coil is disposed in the housing to oppose the optical image stabilization magnet, and the optical image stabilization unit is
configured to rotate the reflective module about the two separate rotational axes,
a focus adjustment unit including a focus adjustment magnet is disposed in the lens module, a focus adjustment coil is disposed in the housing to oppose the focus adjustment magnet, and the focus adjustment unit is configured to move the lens module in the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module.
Regarding claim 8, line 4 recites “a first axis perpendicular to the optical axis, as the rotational axis” and line 8 recites “a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis, as the rotational axis”. These recitations are indefinite for the same reasons explained for claim 1 above and because the two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module have already been introduced in claim 1.
If the above proposed amendments for claims 1 and 3 are adopted, the examiner recommends amending claim 8 as follows:
8. (proposed amendment) The camera module of claim 3, wherein the optical image stabilization unit further includes:
a first optical image stabilization magnet configured to rotate the reflective module about a first rotational axis of the two separate rotational axes and a first optical image stabilization coil configured to oppose the first optical image stabilization magnet;
and a second optical image stabilization magnet configured to rotate the reflective module about a second rotational axis of the two separate rotational axes, perpendicular to the first rotational axis, and a second optical image stabilization coil configured to oppose the second optical image stabilization magnet,
wherein the first and second optical image stabilization magnets are disposed on, at least, one surface of the reflective module.
Regarding claim 9, lines 2-3 recite “the optical axis direction” and lines 4-5 recite “a first axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction” these recitations are indefinite for at least the reasons explained for claims 1, 3 and 8 above.
If the above proposed amendments for claims 1, 3 and 8 are adopted, the examiner recommends amending claim 9 as follows:
9. (proposed amendment) The camera module of claim 8, wherein the first optical image stabilization magnet is magnetized in the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module,
the second optical image stabilization magnet is magnetized in [[a]] the first axis direction.
Although this proposed amendment is not quite as broad as current claim 9, given that the magnetization direction of the second optical image stabilization magnet in the instant application is, in fact, the same X-axis direction as the second portion of the optical axis that intersects the imaging surface, this minor narrowing of the scope is warranted in light of the abundant indefiniteness issues raised by the current language.
Note that at the current time, claims 10 and 12 are considered to be broad, not indefinite, however, appropriate amendments could be made to clarify their subject matter.
Claim 13 recites the limitations:
(lines 3-4) “a lens module … supported by the housing in a direction perpendicular to an optical axis of the lens module”
(lines 5-6): “an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting a direction of the optical axis”
(lines 9-10): “wherein the reflective module is supported by and tiltably coupled to the housing in an optical axis direction”
(lines 11-12): “two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module”
(line 13): “the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident”
(lines 14-15): “an optical axis direction of the lens module”
(lines 15-16): “a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module”
These language choices render the claim indefinite for at least the following reasons.
First, “an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis” is only true in the instant application if “the direction of the optical axis” includes the direction of the optical axis after reflection by the reflective module, which is the X-axis direction that intersects the imaging surface located in an Y-Z plane. In light of this, the limitation in lines 3-4 “a direction perpendicular to an optical axis of the lens module” must be construed as if it recited “a direction perpendicular to one of the directions of an optical axis of the lens module” corresponding to the Z-axis in the instant application, otherwise the recitations in lines 3-4 and 5-6 cannot simultaneously be true.
Second, “the optical axis of the lens module” is not the same thing as “the direction of the optical axis of the lens module during passage through the at least one lens”. This is an important distinction because the optical axis throughout the entirety of the path of the light incident on the camera module and imaged by the image sensor is “the optical axis of the lens module” because the optical axis of the lens module does not cease to exist when the path is folded by the reflective module.
Third, in light of point 1, “perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module” is indefinite because it does not specify whether the rotational axes must be perpendicular to the direction of the optical axis previously introduced.
Fourth, the introduction of “an optical axis direction of the lens module” in lines 13-14 further obfuscates the meaning of the claim because it appears to reintroduce the direction of the optical axis of the lens module, but uses the indefinite article “an” and does not conform the earlier word choices. Thus it is unclear how the directions of lines 15-17 should be interpreted.
If the examiner has correctly guessed the intended scope of claim 13, the examiner recommends the following amendment, that would overcome the above issues and stay best in keeping with the descriptions in the specification as filed, where the Z-axis direction was consistently associated with the optical axis direction through the lenses, and the X-axis direction was referred to as a first axis direction.
13. (proposed amendment) A camera module comprising:
a housing having an internal space;
a lens module disposed in the internal space and supported by the housing in a direction perpendicular to a Z-axis direction of an optical axis of the lens module;
an image sensor, disposed in the housing, configured to have an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting [[a]] an X-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module; and
a reflective module, disposed between the lens module and the image sensor, configured to reflect incident light,
wherein the reflective module is supported by and tiltably coupled to the housing in [[an]] the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module,
the reflective module tilts about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module, and
wherein the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident, and
wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module and in a direction perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module.
Claims 14-16 depend from claim 13 and inherit and do not mitigate the above indefiniteness issue from claim 13.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, the recitations “the direction perpendicular to the optical axis” twice in claim 15 and “in the optical axis direction” and “in the direction of the optical axis” of claim 16 are indefinite for at least the same reasons identified for claim 13 above.
If the above proposed amendment for claim 13 are adopted, the examiner recommends amending claims 15 and 16 as follows:
15. (proposed amendment) The camera module of claim 13, wherein the lens module includes a magnet,
the housing includes a yoke opposing the magnet in the direction perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module, and
the magnet and the yoke form attractive force in the direction perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis of the lens module.
16. (proposed amendment) The camera module of claim 13, wherein
the reflective module and the housing include magnetic bodies, respectively, and
the magnetic bodies are disposed to oppose each other in the Z-axis direction, and form attractive force in the Z-axis direction.
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 1-4, 8-9, 11-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. US 2019/0243112 A1 (hereafter Yao) in view of Kim et al. US 2021/0294184 A1 (hereafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Yao teaches “A camera module (camera 100) comprising:
a housing (paragraphs [0003] and [0004] the folded camera of Yao may be used in small form factor cameras, such as smartphones, tablets or pad devices. Smartphones, tablets and pad devices all include at least an outer housing which encloses all components of the camera with the possible exception of the optical face of the object-side surface of the optical element closest to the object side.) having an internal space (the internal space of the smartphones, tablets or pad device housings);
a lens module (lens system 110), disposed in the internal space (110 is within the internal space of the housing), including at least one lens (lens stack 114, paragraph [0034]: “lens stack 114 including one or more refractive lens elements”) arranged in a direction (AX2) of an optical axis of the lens module (AX1, AX2 and AX3);
an image sensor (photosensor 120), disposed in the housing (120 is within the internal space of the housing), configured to have an imaging surface (image plane 121) oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis (see e.g. Fig. 1A 121 intersects the AX3 portion of the optical axis); and
a reflective module (second prism 142), disposed in the internal space (142 is within the internal space of the housing) between the lens module and the image sensor (see Fig. 1B 142 is between 110 and 120), configured to reflect light passing through the lens module towards the image sensor (see Fig. 1A and paragraph [0034]: “a second prism 142 that redirects the light onto a third axis (AX 3) on which a photosensor 120 of the camera 100 is disposed”), and to tilt (paragraph [0036]: “one or both of the prisms 141 and 142 may be … tilted with respect to the second axis (AX 2) independently of the lens system 110, for example to provide OIS functionality for the camera 110”) about [a] rotational [axis] (142 is tilting, thus it is tilting about an axis such that it’s tilt relative to AX 2 changes)… the reflective module being tiltably coupled to the housing (Second prism 142 is tiltable, see paragraph [0036]. The second prism is also coupled to the housing because if any of the optical elements were not coupled to the housing they would not maintain their proper orientations and positioning with respect to each other as necessary for the device to function.),
wherein the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident (light is incident into the lens module 110 along AX 2 in a direction parallel to the optical axis of 110 which is AX 2. Note that the claim does not require that the incident light is that which is incident on the object-side of the camera module. Furthermore, the choice of “a direction light is incident” implies the existence of multiple directions that light is incident, as opposed to “the direction of light incident on the camera module” which would be a reference to an inherent components of elements previously recited that would have antecedent basis in the recitation of the elements themselves, see MPEP §2173.05(e).), and
wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in an optical axis direction of the lens module (see Fig. 1A, the second prism 142 overlaps lens system 110 in the AX2 direction of the optical axis) and in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (see Fig. 1A, the second prism 142 overlaps lens system 110 in the AX2 direction which is perpendicular to the AX3 and the AX1 directions of the optical axis of the lens module.).”
However, Yao does not specify the rotational axis with sufficient specificity to explicitly teach “tilt about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module.”
Kim teaches “A camera module (camera module 1000) comprising:
a housing (case 130 or case 130 and housing 110) having an internal space (see Figs. 2, 3A and 4, 130 has an internal space within which most of the other components reside);
a lens module (lens module 400), disposed in the internal space (paragraph [0069]: “the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500 may be arranged in the internal space formed by the housing 110”. Thus 400 is inside 110 which is inside the internal space of 130), including at least one lens (e.g. paragraph [0077]: “lens module 400 may include a plurality of lenses”) arranged in a direction of an optical axis of the lens module (at least the optical axis of the plurality of lenses e.g. paragraph [0057]);
an image sensor (image sensor 510), disposed in the housing (paragraph [0069]: “the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500 may be arranged in the internal space formed by the housing 110” Thus 500 is inside 110 which is inside the internal space of 130), configured to have an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis (see e.g. Fig. 4, the sensor is in the X-Y plane which intersects the Z-axis of the optical axis at that point in the light path); and
a reflective module (reflection module 300), disposed in the internal space (paragraph [0069]: “the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500 may be arranged in the internal space formed by the housing 110” Thus 300 is inside 110 which is inside the internal space of 130), configured to reflect light (paragraph [0074]: “the reflective member 310 may be a mirror or a prism that reflects light”) passing through the lens module towards the image sensor (the reflected light from 310 passes through the lens module 400 toward the image sensor 510), and to tilt about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (paragraph [0136]: “the first driving portion 810 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the first axis (the X axis) as a rotation axis, and the second driving portion 830 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the second axis (the Y axis) as a rotation axis (see FIGS. 4 and 7).” Both the X axis and the Y axis rotational axes are perpendicular to the optical axis through the lens which aligns with the Z axis.), the reflective module being tiltably coupled to the housing (see Figs. 9A-9C and 10A-10C. 300 is tiltably coupled to 110, and thus also tiltably coupled to 130),
wherein the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident (the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to the direction of the light incident on the lens module), and
wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in an optical axis direction of the lens module (300 overlaps 400 in the Z-direction of the optical axis) and in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (For the purpose of the second interpretation of this indefinite limitation, let housing 110, which houses the lens module be considered to be part of the lens module, consistent with the instant application where carrier 230 must be considered to be part of the lens module to meet the present limitation. In which case, the reflective module 300 overlaps 110 in the X-axis and Y-axis directions both of which are perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis through the lens module).”
Kim further teaches (paragraphs [0128]-[0129]): “A camera module 1000 may pivot the reflection module 300 to perform OIS in capturing an image. For example, when shaking occurs during capturing of an image, a relative displacement corresponding to the shaking may be applied to the reflection module 300 to perform OIS.”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose as the two rotational axes of the tilting of the prism member of Yao, rotational axes that are perpendicular to the optical axis through the lens module as taught by Kim. One would have been motivated to make such a choice because Yao teaches (paragraph [0036]): “one or both of the prisms 141 and 142 may be … tilted with respect to the second axis (AX 2) independently of the lens system 110, for example to provide OIS functionality for the camera 110” and Kim teaches that the pivot axes which are perpendicular to the optical axis enables such a desired optical image stabilization (paragraph [0128]-[0129].
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
It is worth noting that the OIS stabilization mechanisms of Kim are being incorporated into the camera of Yao where the lens module is on the object side of the claimed prism. This combination is most similar to changing the direction of light within Kim to make the lens module the object side and the prism the image side. That refractive and reflective optical systems work in the same manner in reverse is a fundamental principle of optics. Thus, that the reflective module rotates about two axes that are both perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module is sufficient to also teach that the rotation axes would be perpendicular to the optical axis of incident light emitted by the lens module towards the reflective module, which is the configuration of Yao.
In light of the indefiniteness issues above, in the case that Yao fails to teach “wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module… in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module” this would also have been obvious as follows.
As explained above, Kim teaches “wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in an optical axis direction of the lens module (300 overlaps 400 in the Z-direction of the optical axis) and in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (For the purpose of the second interpretation of this indefinite limitation, let housing 110, which houses the lens module be considered to be part of the lens module, consistent with the instant application where carrier 230 must be considered to be part of the lens module to meet the present limitation. In which case, the reflective module 300 overlaps 110 in the X-axis and Y-axis directions both of which are perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis through the lens module).”
Kim further teaches (paragraph [0068]): “The housing 110 may provide the internal space to accommodate the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500.”
(paragraph [0111]): “The internal space of the housing 110 may be divided into a space in which the reflection module 300 is disposed and a space in which the lens module 400 is disposed,”
(paragraph [0215]): “The lens module 400 may be moved in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction) to perform focus adjustment. A third ball member B3 may be disposed between the lens module 400 and the housing 110, and the lens module 400 may be guided by the third ball member B3 to be moved in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction).”
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 housing as part of the lens module as taught by Kim, which overlaps the reflecting module in directions perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis through the lenses as taught by Kim, for the purpose of both tiltably housing the reflection module and slidably housing the lenses as taught by Kim (e.g. paragraphs [0068].[0111],[0215]).
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claim 2, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” and Yao further teaches “wherein the housing has a first space through which the optical axis passes and in which the reflective module is disposed (first portion of the housing in which 110 is disposed), and
a second space in which a portion of the lens module is disposed (second portion of the housing in which 142 is disposed).”
Regarding claim 3, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 1,” and Yao further teaches “wherein an optical image stabilization unit (paragraph [0006]: “provide OIS functionality” thus there exists a unit that is providing this functionality.)… and the optical image stabilization unit is configured to rotate the reflective module about … the rotational axis (paragraph [0006]: “one or both of the prisms may be translated with respect to the second axis (AX 2) independently of the lens system and/or tilted with respect to the second axis (AX 2) independently of the lens system, for example to provide OIS functionality for the camera”)…
and a focus adjustment unit (paragraph [0006]: “an actuator component… to provide autofocus functionality for the camera.”)… and the focus adjustment unit is configured to move the lens module in the optical axis direction (paragraph [0006]: “an actuator component configured to move the lens system on (parallel to) the second axis (AX 2) relative to and independently of the prisms to provide autofocus functionality for the camera.”).”
However, Yao fails to explicitly disclose: “wherein an optical image stabilization unit including an optical image stabilization magnet is disposed in the reflective module and an optical image stabilization coil is disposed in the housing to oppose the optical image stabilization magnet… a focus adjustment unit including a focus adjustment magnet is disposed in the lens module, a focus adjustment coil is disposed in the housing to oppose the focus adjustment magnet.”
Kim teaches “The camera module of claim 1, wherein an optical image stabilization unit (first or second driving assemblies 810 and 830) including an optical image stabilization magnet (first magnet 811 and second magnet 831) is disposed in the reflective module (811 and 831 are disposed on 330) and an optical image stabilization coil (first and second coils 813 and 833) is disposed in the housing (see Fig. 6) to oppose the optical image stabilization magnet (see e.g. Fig. 6), and the optical image stabilization unit is configured to rotate the reflective module about the axis perpendicular to the optical axis, as the rotational axis (e.g. paragraph [0136]: “the first driving portion 810 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the first axis (the X axis) as a rotation axis, and the second driving portion 830 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the second axis (the Y axis) as a rotation axis”), and
a focus adjustment unit (third driving portion 900, which provides autofocusing, see paragraph [0063]: “to implement the AF, … and the like in the camera module, an actuator configured to move the plurality of lens groups in an optical axis direction (a Z-axis direction), … may be installed.” An ordinary skilled artisan knows that autofocusing by movement of the plurality of lenses requires movement in the optical axis direction.) including a focus adjustment magnet (third magnet 910) is disposed in the lens module (910 is disposed on 410), a focus adjustment coil (third coil 930) is disposed in the housing (see Figs. 3B or 6) to oppose the focus adjustment magnet (see e.g. Fig. 3B), and the focus adjustment unit is configured to move the lens module in the optical axis direction (e.g. paragraph [0219]: “A third driving portion 900 may be provided to move the lens module 400 in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction) (see FIG. 4).”).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose as the unspecified OIS driving part and AF driving part of Yao, the implementation of Kim involving appropriately positioned opposing magnets and coils. One would have been motivated to make such a choice because Yao does not specify any preference for a particular driving arrangement and Kim teaches that these drivers enable both image stabilization by rotations of the prism about two perpendicular axes and autofocusing functionality by translating the lens module in the optical axis direction.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claim 4, the Yao-Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 3,” and Yao further teaches “wherein the focus adjustment unit is parallelly disposed to the image sensor (see Fig. 1A the actuator 160 is parallelly disposed to the photosensor 120.” However Yao fails to explicitly teach “and the optical image stabilization unit is perpendicularly disposed to the image sensor.”
Kim teaches “The camera module of claim 3, … the optical image stabilization unit is perpendicularly disposed to the image sensor (see Fig. 4 the major surface of the optical image stablization magnets 811 and 831 are perpendicularly disposed to the imaging surface).”
Note that Kim positions magnets 811 and 831 on the lateral sides of the prism that are perpendicular to the entrance and exit surfaces of the prism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the OIS unit of the Yao-Kim combination on the lateral sides of the prism that are perpendicular to the entrance and exit surfaces of the prism as taught by Kim such that the optical image stabilization unit is perpendicularly disposed to the image sensor because Kim teaches that an OIS actuator positioned accordingly enables the performance of image stabilization.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 3,” however, Yao fails to teach (claim 8) “wherein the optical image stabilization unit further includes:
a first optical image stabilization magnet configured to rotate the reflective module about a first axis perpendicular to the optical axis, as the rotational axis, and a first optical image stabilization coil configured to oppose the first optical image stabilization magnet; and
a second optical image stabilization magnet configured to rotate the reflective module about a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis, as the rotational axis,
and a second optical image stabilization coil configured to oppose the second optical image stabilization magnet, wherein the first and second optical image stabilization magnets are disposed on, at least, one surface of the reflective module.”
(claim 9) “wherein the first optical image stabilization magnet is magnetized in the optical axis direction, and
the second optical image stabilization magnet is magnetized in a first axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction.”
Kim teaches (claim 8) “The camera module of claim 3, wherein the optical image stabilization unit further includes:
a first optical image stabilization magnet (811) configured to rotate the reflective module about a first axis perpendicular to the optical axis, as the rotational axis (paragraph [0136]: “the first driving portion 810 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the first axis (the X axis) as a rotation axis”), and a first optical image stabilization coil (813) configured to oppose the first optical image stabilization magnet (paragraph [0139]: “The first coil 813 may be disposed to oppose the first magnet 811”); and
a second optical image stabilization magnet (831) configured to rotate the reflective module about a second axis perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis, as the rotational axis (paragraph [0136]: “the second driving portion 830 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the second axis (the Y axis) as a rotation axis”),
and a second optical image stabilization coil (833) configured to oppose the second optical image stabilization magnet (paragraph [0149]: “The second coil 833 may be disposed to oppose the second magnet 831”),
wherein the first and second optical image stabilization magnets are disposed on, at least, one surface of the reflective module (paragraph [0140]: “The first magnet 811 may include a plurality of magnets disposed on both side walls of the holder 330” and paragraph [0150]: “The second magnet 831 may include a plurality of magnets, disposed on both side walls of the holder 330”).”
(claim 9) “The camera module of claim 8, wherein the first optical image stabilization magnet is magnetized in the optical axis direction (paragraph [0141]: “a surface of the first magnet 811 facing the first coil 813 may have a first polarity region 811a and a second polarity region 811b that are magnetized in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction).”), and
the second optical image stabilization magnet is magnetized in a first axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction (paragraphs [0151]-[0152]: “A surface of the second magnet 831 facing the second coil 833 may have a first polarity region 831a and a second polarity region 831b that are magnetized in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction). For example, on a surface of the second magnet 831 facing the second coil 833, a first polarity region 831a, a neutral region 831c, and a second polarity region 831b may be sequentially arranged in the first axis direction (the X-axis direction).”).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose as the unspecified OIS driving part of Yao, the implementation of Kim involving appropriately positioned and magnetized magnets and coils opposing them that enable the rotation of the prism about two rotational axes. One would have been motivated to make such a choice because Yao does not specify any preference for a particular driving arrangement and Kim teaches that these drivers enable image stabilization by rotations of the prism about two perpendicular axes.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 2,” and Yao further teaches “wherein the reflective module includes a reflective member (second prism 142) configured to change a path of the light (142 changes the path of the light from axis AX 2 to axis AX 3),” however, Yao fails to teach (claim 11) “a holder on which the reflective member is mounted, and
wherein a rotation plate is further disposed between the holder and the housing.”
(claim 12) “further comprising:
first ball members disposed between the holder and the rotation plate to be spaced apart from each other in a first axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis; and
second ball members disposed between the rotation plate and the housing to be
spaced apart from each other in a second axis direction perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis.”
Kim teaches (claim 11) “The camera module of claim 2, wherein the reflective module includes a reflective member (reflective member 310) configured to change a path of the light (paragraph [0074]: “The reflective member 310 may be configured to change the traveling direction of light”), and
a holder (holder 330) on which the reflective member is mounted (paragraph [0073]: “a holder 330 on which the reflective member 310 is mounted.”), and
wherein a rotation plate (guide member 200, which is a rotation plate in that balls B1 and B2 which enable the rotation are both seated thereon, see e.g. Fig. 6) is further disposed between the holder and the housing (e.g. paragraph [0116]: “The guide member 200 may be disposed between the internal side surface of the housing 110 and the reflection module 300.” thus 200 is also between 130 and 300.).”
(claim 12) “The camera module of claim 11, further comprising:
first ball members (first ball member B1 of which there are two) disposed between the holder and the rotation plate (see Fig. 6 and paragraph [0124]: “the first ball member B1 may be disposed between the first receiving groove 335 and the second receiving groove 230”) to be spaced apart from each other (see vertical distance between the two grooves 335 in Fig. 6 and paragraph [0122]: “The first ball member B1 may include a plurality of ball members spaced apart from each other on the first axis (the X axis)”) in a first axis direction (the X-axis in Fig. 6) perpendicular to the optical axis (the X-axis is perpendicular to the Z-axis); and
second ball members (second ball member B2 of which there are two) disposed between the rotation plate and the housing (see Fig. 6 and paragraph [0121]: “second ball member B2 may be disposed between the housing 110 and the guide member 200.”) to be spaced apart from each other in a second axis direction (paragraph [0122]: “the second ball member B2 may include a plurality of ball members spaced apart from each other on the second axis (the Y axis).”) perpendicular to the optical axis and the first axis direction (the Y-axis is perpendicular to both the Z-axis and the X-axis).”
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 holder, a rotation plate, two sets of spaced apart ball members, one set between the holder and the rotation plate, and one set between the rotation plate and the housing, with appropriate alignments thereof as taught by Kim in the camera module of the Yao – Kim combination because Yao is silent on how to implement the tilting of the prism for OIS functionality and Kim teaches that appropriate use of a holder, a rotation plate, two sets of spaced apart ball members enables the rotation of the prism about two rotational axes to provide OIS functionality.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claim 13, Yao teaches “A camera module (camera 100) comprising:
a housing (paragraphs [0003] and [0004] the folded camera of Yao may be used in small form factor cameras, such as smartphones, tablets or pad devices. Smartphones, tablets and pad devices all include at least an outer housing which encloses all components of the camera with the possible exception of the optical face of the object-side surface of the optical element closest to the object side.) having an internal space (the internal space of the smartphones, tablets or pad device housings);
a lens module (lens system 110) disposed in the internal space (110 is within the internal space of the housing) and … an optical axis of the lens module (one or more of optical axes AX 1, AX2 and AX 3)
an image sensor (photosensor 120), disposed in the housing (120 is within the internal space of the housing), configured to have an imaging surface (image plane 121) oriented in a direction intersecting a direction of the optical axis (see e.g. Fig. 1A 121 intersects the AX3 portion of the optical axis); and
a reflective module (second prism 142), disposed between the lens module and the image sensor (142 is between 110 and 120 see Fig. 1A), configured to reflect incident light (see Fig. 1A and paragraph [0034]: “a second prism 142 that redirects the light onto a third axis (AX 3) on which a photosensor 120 of the camera 100 is disposed”),
wherein the reflective module is supported by and tiltably coupled to the housing (Second prism 142 is tiltable see paragraph [0036]: “one or both of the prisms 141 and 142 may be … tilted with respect to the second axis (AX 2)”. Second prism is also supported by and coupled to the housing because all of the optical elements of the camera have to be coupled to the housing so that they maintain their desired orientations and positioning necessary to perform their functions.)… and
the reflective module tilts (paragraph [0036]: “one or both of the prisms 141 and 142 may be … tilted with respect to the second axis (AX 2) independently of the lens system 110, for example to provide OIS functionality for the camera 110”) about [a] rotational [axis] (142 is tilting, thus it is tilting about an axis such that it’s tilt relative to AX 2 changes)… and
wherein the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident (light is incident into the lens module 110 along AX 2 in a direction parallel to the optical axis of 110 which is AX 2. Note that the claim does not require that the incident light is that which is incident on the object-side of the camera module. Furthermore, the choice of “a direction light is incident” implies the existence of multiple directions that light is incident, as opposed to “the direction of light incident on the camera module” which would be a reference to an inherent components of elements previously recited that would have antecedent basis in the recitation of the elements themselves, see MPEP §2173.05(e).) and
wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in an optical axis direction of the lens module (see Fig. 1A, the second prism 142 overlaps lens system 110 in the AX2 direction of the optical axis) and in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (see Fig. 1A, the second prism 142 overlaps lens system 110 in the AX2 direction which is perpendicular to the AX3 and the AX1 directions of the optical axis of the lens module.).”
However, Yao fails to explicitly teach “a lens module … supported by the housing in a direction perpendicular to an optical axis;…
wherein the reflective module is supported by the housing in the direction of the optical axis, and
the reflective module tilts about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module.”
Kim teaches “A camera module (camera module 1000) comprising:
a housing (case 130 or case 130 and housing 110) having an internal space (see Figs. 2, 3A and 4, 130 has an internal space within which most of the other components reside and/or e.g. paragraph [0069]: “the internal space formed by the housing 110”);
a lens module (lens module 400) disposed in the internal space (paragraph [0069]: “the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500 may be arranged in the internal space formed by the housing 110”) and supported by the housing in a direction perpendicular to an optical axis of the lens module (400 is supported by 110 via balls B3 in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis through the lenses. 400 is also supported by case 130 in the X and Y directions perpendicular to the Z-direction in that 130 surrounds and supports 110 which supports 400.);
an image sensor (image sensor 510), disposed in the housing (paragraph [0069]: “the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500 may be arranged in the internal space formed by the housing 110”. Since 110 is within 130, 510 is also disposed in 130.), configured to have an imaging surface oriented in a direction intersecting a direction of the optical axis (see e.g. Fig. 4, the sensor is in the X-Y plane which intersects the Z-axis of the optical axis at that point in the light path); and
a reflective module (reflection module 300), … configured to reflect incident light (paragraph [0074]: “the reflective member 310 may be a mirror or a prism that reflects light”),
wherein the reflective module is supported by and tiltably coupled to the housing in an optical axis direction (paragraph [0131]: “the reflection module 300 … being supported by the first ball member B1” and paragraph [0133]: “the guide member 200 may pivot on the second axis (the Y axis) as a rotation axis while being supported by the second ball member B2” Both of these support directions are in the optical axis direction parallel to the Z-axis. Thus 300 is supported by both 110 and 130 that surrounds 110. Further 300 is tiltable see e.g. paragraph [0136].), and
the reflective module tilts about two separate rotational axes perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (paragraph [0136]: “the first driving portion 810 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the first axis (the X axis) as a rotation axis, and the second driving portion 830 configured to pivot the reflection module 300 on the second axis (the Y axis) as a rotation axis (see FIGS. 4 and 7).” Both the X axis and the Y axis rotational axes are perpendicular to the optical axis through the lens which aligns with the Z axis.),
wherein the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident (the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to the direction of the light incident on the lens module), and
wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in an optical axis direction of the lens module (300 overlaps 400 in the Z-direction of the optical axis) and in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (For the purpose of the second interpretation of this indefinite limitation, let housing 110, which houses the lens module be considered to be part of the lens module, consistent with the instant application where carrier 230 must be considered to be part of the lens module to meet the present limitation. In which case, the reflective module 300 overlaps 110 in the X-axis and Y-axis directions both of which are perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis through the lens module).”
Kim further teaches (paragraphs [0128]-[0129]): “A camera module 1000 may pivot the reflection module 300 to perform OIS in capturing an image. For example, when shaking occurs during capturing of an image, a relative displacement corresponding to the shaking may be applied to the reflection module 300 to perform OIS.”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose as the rotational axis of the tilting of the prism member of Yao, a rotational axis that is perpendicular to the optical axis through the lens module as taught by Kim. One would have been motivated to make such a choice because Yao teaches (paragraph [0036]): “one or both of the prisms 141 and 142 may be … tilted with respect to the second axis (AX 2) independently of the lens system 110, for example to provide OIS functionality for the camera 110” and Kim teaches that the pivot axes which are perpendicular to the optical axis enables such a desired optical image stabilization (paragraph [0128]-[0129].
Further it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose to support the lens by the housing in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis and to support the prism by the housing in a direction parallel to the optical axis as taught by Kim because Yao does not specify how the lens module and reflective module should be arranged in the housing and Yao teaches that supporting the lens by balls B3 and the prism by balls B1 and B2 enables autofocusing and OIS functionality.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
It is worth noting that the OIS stabilization mechanisms of Kim are being incorporated into the camera of Yao where the lens module is on the object side of the claimed prism. This combination is most similar to changing the direction of light within Kim to make the lens module the object side and the prism the image side. That refractive and reflective optical systems work in the same manner in reverse is a fundamental principle of optics. Thus, that the reflective module rotates about two axes that are both perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module is sufficient to also teach that the rotation axes would be perpendicular to the optical axis of incident light emitted by the lens module towards the reflective module, which is the configuration of Yao.
In light of the indefiniteness issues above, in the case that Yao fails to teach “wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module… in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module” this would also have been obvious as follows.
As explained above, Kim teaches “wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module both in an optical axis direction of the lens module (300 overlaps 400 in the Z-direction of the optical axis) and in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (For the purpose of the second interpretation of this indefinite limitation, let housing 110, which houses the lens module be considered to be part of the lens module, consistent with the instant application where carrier 230 must be considered to be part of the lens module to meet the present limitation. In which case, the reflective module 300 overlaps 110 in the X-axis and Y-axis directions both of which are perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis through the lens module).”
Kim further teaches (paragraph [0068]): “The housing 110 may provide the internal space to accommodate the reflection module 300, the lens module 400, and the image sensor module 500.”
(paragraph [0111]): “The internal space of the housing 110 may be divided into a space in which the reflection module 300 is disposed and a space in which the lens module 400 is disposed,”
(paragraph [0215]): “The lens module 400 may be moved in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction) to perform focus adjustment. A third ball member B3 may be disposed between the lens module 400 and the housing 110, and the lens module 400 may be guided by the third ball member B3 to be moved in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction).”
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 housing as part of the lens module as taught by Kim, which overlaps the reflecting module in directions perpendicular to the Z-axis direction of the optical axis through the lenses as taught by Kim, for the purpose of both tiltably housing the reflection module and slidably housing the lenses as taught by Kim (e.g. paragraphs [0068].[0111],[0215]).
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claim 14, the Yao- Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 13,” and Yao further teaches “wherein the image sensor is disposed on a side of the housing (in e.g. Fig. 1A, one can denote the right-hand side of the housing in which the prism 142 and photosensor 120 are disposed as one side of the housing) different from a side of the housing that supports the lens module (in e.g. Fig. 1A, one can denote the left-hand side of the housing in which prism 141 and lens system 110 are disposed as a different side of the housing. Note that the claim recites “sides” of the housing, not “surfaces” of the housing.).”
Regarding claim 16, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 13,” however, Yao fails to teach “wherein the reflective module and the housing include magnetic bodies, respectively, and
the magnetic bodies are disposed to oppose each other in the direction of the optical axis, and form attractive force in the direction of the optical axis.”
Kim teaches “wherein the reflective module and the housing include magnetic bodies (paragraph [0113]: “a pulling yoke 710 may be disposed on the housing 110 and a pulling magnet 730 may be disposed in the reflection module 300.”), respectively, and
the magnetic bodies are disposed to oppose each other in the direction of the optical axis (710 and 730 oppose each other in the Z-direction, paragraph [0113]: “The pulling yoke 710 and the pulling magnet 730 may be disposed to oppose each other in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction)”), and form attractive force in the direction of the optical axis (paragraph [0114]: “the pulling yoke 710 and the pulling magnet 730 may generate attractive force in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction)”).”
Kim further teaches (paragraph [0123]): “Due to attractive force between the pulling yoke 710 and the pulling magnet 730, the first ball member B1 may be in contact with the guide member 200 and the reflection module 300, and the second ball member B2 may be in contact with the housing 110 and the guide member 200.”
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 pulling yoke and a pulling magnet as taught by Kim for the purpose of holding balls B1 and B2 in position as taught by Kim in order to enable the rotational movements of the prism for image stabilization as taught by Kim.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Claims 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. US 2019/0243112 A1 (hereafter Yao) in view of Kim et al. US 2021/0294184 A1 (hereafter Kim) as applied to claims 2 and 13 above, and further in view of Lee et al. US 2019/0004328 A1 (hereafter Lee).
Regarding claim 10, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 2,” and Yao further teaches “wherein the lens module further includes a lens barrel (lens barrel 112) on which the at least one lens is mounted (e.g. paragraph [0034]: “a lens stack 114 including one or more refractive lens elements mounted in a lens barrel 112”).”
However, Yao fails to teach “and
a carrier accommodating the lens barrel, and
the carrier has an extension portion extending in the direction of the optical axis, the extension portion disposed in the second space.”
Lee teaches (claim 1) “A camera module (camera module 1001) comprising:
a housing (housing 1010) having an internal space (paragraph [0073]: “an internal space of the housing 1010” see e.g. Fig. 3);
a lens module (lens module 1200), disposed in the internal space (paragraph [0075]: “The housing 1010 has an internal space so that the reflecting module 1100, the lens module 1200, and the image sensor module 1300 are inserted thereinto.”), including at least one lens (paragraph [0072]: “The lens module 1200 may include lenses”) arranged in a direction of an optical axis (the optical axis includes the optical axis through the lenses along the Z-axis direction);
an image sensor (image sensor 1310), disposed in the housing (paragraph [0075]: “The housing 1010 has an internal space so that the reflecting module 1100, the lens module 1200, and the image sensor module 1300 are inserted thereinto.”), configured to have an imaging surface (the imaging surface of 1310) oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis (see e.g. Fig. 4A); and
a reflective module (reflecting module 1100), disposed in the internal space (paragraph [0075]: “The housing 1010 has an internal space so that the reflecting module 1100, the lens module 1200, and the image sensor module 1300 are inserted thereinto.”)… configured to reflect light passing through the lens module towards the image sensor (paragraph [0071]: “A path of the light incident through the opening 1031 is changed by the reflecting module 1100 or 1100-2 so that the light is directed toward the lens module 1200.” where the action of the light passing through the lens module towards the image sensor happens to be after the reflection by the reflective module.) and to tilt about [a] rotational [axis] (Figs. 10A-10C and paragraph [0101]: “the moving holder 1120 may be rotated around the first axis (the X axis) by a first driving part 1140”)… perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module (the X-axis is perpendicular to the Z-axis), the reflective module being tiltably coupled to the housing (paragraph [0101]: “the moving holder 1120 may be rotated around the first axis” see coupling members including ball bearings 1130),
wherein the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident (the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to the direction of the light incident on the lens module).”
(claim 2) “wherein the housing has a first space through which the optical axis passes and in which the reflective module is disposed (a first space within 1010, in front of the lens module, in which the reflecting module is disposed and where the Z-direction portion of the optical axis begins see Fig. 4 and paragraph [0073]: “n an internal space of the housing 1010 or 1010-2, the reflecting module 1100 or 1100-2 is provided in front of the lens module 1200”), and
a second space (a second space within 1010 where the lens module 1200 is disposed, such as a first portion thereof where the extension of the bottom of 1210 to the object side of where magnets 1241a and 1243a are held, in which only a portion of the lens module resides) in which a portion of the lens module is disposed (only a portion of lens barrel 1220 is in the second space defined by the extension of the bottom of 1210).”
(claim 10) “wherein the lens module further includes a lens barrel (lens barrel 1220) on which the at least one lens is mounted (e.g. paragraph [0124]: “the lens barrel 1220… including the lenses stacked therein”), and
a carrier (carrier 1210) accommodating the lens barrel (e.g. paragraph [0124]: “the lens barrel 1220 provided on the carrier 1210”), and
the carrier has an extension portion (the extension of the bottom of 1210 on the object side of the portion that holds magnets 1241a and 1243a) extending in the direction of the optical axis (see Fig. 3), the extension portion disposed in the second space (the second space was defined above as the portion of the internal space of the housing in which the extension resides).”
Lee further teaches (paragraphs [0127]-[0129]): “[0127] The carrier 1210 is configured to be moved in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction) for the purpose of auto-focusing (AF) (the lens barrel 1220 on the carrier 1210 may be also moved). As an example, the carrier 1210 is configured to be movable in a direction (including an opposite direction to the direction) in which the light which direction has been changed into the second axis direction (the Y-axis direction) by the reflecting module 1100 passes through the lenses.
[0128] In addition, the lens barrel 1220 may be moved in the first axis direction (the X-axis direction) approximately perpendicular to the second axis (the Y axis) and the optical axis (the Z axis) for the purpose of the OIS in the first axis direction (the X-axis direction).
[0129] Therefore, the second driving part 1240 generates driving force so that the carrier 1210 is movable in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction) and the lens barrel 1220 is movable in the first axis direction (the X-axis direction). That is, the second driving part 1240 may move the lens barrel 1220 to change a distance between the lens barrel 1220 and the reflecting module 1100, or the lens barrel 1220 may be moved in the first axis direction (the X-axis direction) to allow the OIS in the first axis direction (the X-axis direction) to be performed.”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a carrier that accommodates the lens barrel which has an extension portion extending in the optical axis direction into the second space as taught by Lee in the device of the Yao – Kim combination because Yao teaches “an actuator 160 component or components configured to move the lens system 110 on (parallel to) the second axis (AX 2)” in paragraph [0036] but does not supply any of the details thereof and Lee discloses mechanical components that can be utilized for this purpose.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Regarding claim 15, the Yao – Kim combination teaches “The camera module of claim 13.”
However, Yao is silent regarding “wherein the lens module includes a magnet,
the housing includes a yoke opposing the magnet in the direction perpendicular to the optical axis, and
the magnet and the yoke form attractive force in the direction perpendicular to the optical axis.”
Lee teaches (claim 13) “A camera module (camera module 1001) comprising:
a housing (housing 1010) having an internal space (paragraph [0073]: “an internal space of the housing 1010” see e.g. Fig. 3);
a lens module (lens module 1200) disposed in the internal space (paragraph [0075]: “The housing 1010 has an internal space so that the reflecting module 1100, the lens module 1200, and the image sensor module 1300 are inserted thereinto.”) and supported by the housing in a direction perpendicular to an optical axis (1200 is supported by the housing 1010 underneath it in the Y-direction that is perpendicular to the Z-direction that is the optical axis through the lenses);
an image sensor (image sensor 1310), disposed in the housing (paragraph [0075]: “The housing 1010 has an internal space so that the reflecting module 1100, the lens module 1200, and the image sensor module 1300 are inserted thereinto.”), configured to have an imaging surface (the imaging surface of 1310) oriented in a direction intersecting a direction of the optical axis (see e.g. Fig. 4A); and
a reflective module (reflecting module 1100)… configured to reflect incident light (paragraph [0071]: “A path of the light incident through the opening 1031 is changed by the reflecting module 1100 or 1100-2 so that the light is directed toward the lens module 1200.”),
wherein the reflective module is supported by (paragraph [0075]: “The housing 1010 has an internal space so that the reflecting module 1100… are inserted thereinto.”) and tiltably coupled to the housing (Figs. 10A-10C and paragraph [0101]: “the moving holder 1120 may be rotated around the first axis (the X axis) by a first driving part 1140”) in the direction of the optical axis (see support provided by ball bearings 1130 and seating grooves 1011 and 1121 which tiltably support 1120 in the Z-axis direction), and
the reflective module tilts about rotational [axis] (Figs. 10A-10C and paragraph [0101]: “the moving holder 1120 may be rotated around the first axis (the X axis) by a first driving part 1140”)… perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module the X-axis is perpendicular to the Z-axis), and
wherein the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to a direction light is incident (the optical axis of the lens module is parallel to the direction of the light incident on the lens module).”
(claim 15) “wherein the lens module includes a magnet (magnets 1241a and 1243a see paragraph [0145]: “magnets 1241a and 1243a mounted in the carrier 1210”),
the housing includes a yoke (yokes 1216 paragraph [0145]: “housing 1010 is provided with yokes 1216”) opposing the magnet in the direction perpendicular to the optical axis (most easily seen in Fig. 9), and
the magnet and the yoke form attractive force (paragraph [0146]: “Attractive force acts between the yokes 1216 and the magnets 1241a and 1243a.”) in the direction perpendicular to the optical axis (the attractive force between the yokes and magnets is in the direction in which they face each other, i.e. the Y-direction which is perpendicular to the Z-direction).”
Lee further teaches (paragraph [0146]): “Attractive force acts between the yokes 1216 and the magnets 1241a and 1243a. Therefore, the carrier 1210 is moved in the optical axis direction (the Z-axis direction) by the driving force of the second driving part 1240 in a state in which it is in contact with the ball members 1211.”
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 opposing yokes and magnet pairs as taught by Lee in the device of the Yao – Kim combination so that the carrier can be moved in a state in which it is in contact with the ball members as taught by Lee (paragraph [0146]) which an ordinary skilled artisan would understand is to prevent loss of contact with the balls that might allow the balls to exit the guide grooves.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because Yao is silent regarding the mechanical details of how the optical elements should be configured and thus is ripe for improvement with respect to these mechanical aspects.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 5, the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the following limitation when taken in context of the claim as a whole: “a substrate comprising: a first region disposed on the housing, configured to oppose the imaging surface of the image sensor; a second region, extending from the first region, configured to be perpendicular to the first region; and
a third region, extending from the second region, configured to be perpendicular to the first region and parallel to the second region.”
In particular, Kim teaches (claim 5) “a substrate (substrate 170 and printed circuit board 530, which are “a substrate” in that together they provide a substrate for the coils and image sensor) comprising:
a first region (530), disposed in the housing (530 must be disposed on the housing in order to align with and receive the light from the lens module), configured to oppose the imaging surface of the image sensor (the major surface of 530 opposes the imaging surface of 510 in that they are parallel to each other in X-Y planes separated by the body of 510);
a second region (the side surfaces of 170 on which 930 resides), extending from the first region (the side surfaces of 170 extend in the negative Z-direction from 530. Note that the claim does not require that the substrate be monolithic or continuous), configured to be perpendicular to the first region (the side surfaces of 170 are perpendicular to 530); and
a third region (the region of the side surface of 170 on which 813 and 833 reside), extending from the second region (the region with 813 and 833 extends in the negative Z direction from the second region), configured to be perpendicular to the first region (the side surfaces of 170 are perpendicular to 530) and parallel to the second region (the third region with 813 and 833 is parallel to the second region with 930).”
However, Kim fails to teach that the reflective module is disposed between the lens module and the image sensor as required by claim 1. Placing a reflective module between the lens module and the image sensor would change the orientations of the substrate relative to the image sensor.
Thus the Yao-Kim combination teaches the camera module of claim 3, but does not reasonably suggest the camera module of claim 5.
Claims 6 and 7 depend from claim 5 and are allowed for at least the reason stated above.
Furthermore, claims 6 and 7 are allowable for the following additional reasons.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the following limitation when taken in context of the claim as a whole: “The camera module of claim 5, wherein the first region and the second region are disposed on an outer surface of the housing, and the third region is disposed on an inner surface of the housing.”
Regarding claim 7, the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the following limitation when taken in context of the claim as a whole: “The camera module of claim 5, wherein the focus adjustment coil is disposed in the first region, and the optical image stabilization coil is disposed in the third region.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Paragraphs 1-4 of page 7 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks do not contain any arguments with regard to the outstanding rejections.
Under the heading “Allowable Subject Matter” on page 7 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant notes that claims 5-7 have been indicated as containing allowable subject matter. No argument is made in this section.
Under the heading “Claim Rejections Under 35 USC §112” on page 7 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the 35 USC §112 rejections of the previous office action have been overcome by the amendments to the claims. The examiner disagrees for the reasons explained in the 35 USC §112(b) rejections above.
Under the heading “Claim Rejections Under 35 USC §102 and §103” on page 8 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant first lists all of the prior art rejections applied in the non-final office action mailed April 3, 2026.
Under the heading “Independent Claims 1 and 13” on page 8 of 12 through the first paragraph of page 9 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant presents amended claim 1 and explains what features of the instant application correspond to the new limitations. The examiner thanks the applicant for this concise explanation.
In the second and third paragraphs of page 9 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant introduces that they will be arguing that Yao, Kim and Lee teach only teach that the reflective module overlaps the lens module in the optical-axis direction of the lens module, and thus do not meet the further new feature “wherein the reflective module overlaps the lens module… in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens module.” The arguments underlying this conclusion follow these paragraphs.
In the paragraph spanning pages 9 to 10 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant quotes from the previous office action regarding the teachings of Yao. No argument is made in this paragraph.
In the first full paragraph of page 10 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant reproduces Fig. 1A of Yao and argues that second prism 142 only overlaps the lens module in one direction, namely the optical-axis direction of the lens module. This argument is not persuasive because it is not commensurate with the current claim. As noted in the 112(b) rejections above, because the imaging surface is oriented in a direction intersecting the direction of the optical axis, the “direction of the optical axis of the lens module” cannot by narrowly construed as only corresponding to the Z-direction of the instant application that is the direction of the optical axis within the lens portion. In particular, the imaging surface intersects the X-direction is also a direction of the optical axis of the lens module because the portion of the optical path between the reflection and the imaging surface is still part of the optical axis of the lens module. Thus, with respect to Yao Fig. 1A, the overlap in the AX2 direction is both an overlap in the optical axis direction (AX2) and perpendicular to the optical axis directions AX3 or AX1.
In the third paragraph of page 10 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant first notes that Kim’s reflection module is in front of the lens module, on an opposite side of the lens module from the image sensor module 500. This is a true statement, but applicant has not explained in what way this undermines the present rejection. Secondly in this paragraph the applicant argues that Kim only teaches an overlap between the reflective module and the lens module in the optical axis direction. This argument is not persuasive for at least the following reasons. Firstly, just as with Yao above, the indefiniteness issues of claims 1 and 13 are such that one cannot construe “the optical axis of the lens module” as solely corresponding to the Z-direction of the instant application. Secondly, as pointed out on page 9 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks, it is not the lenses themselves that overlap the reflective module in a direction perpendicular to the Z-axis, but rather carrier 230. Thus, it is perfectly reasonable to include housing 110 of Kim, which houses the lens module, to be considered a part of the lens module. This housing 110 overlaps the reflective module in X and Y directions, both perpendicular to the Z-direction of the optical axis through the lenses.
In the paragraph spanning pages 10 and 11 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant concludes that the combination of Yao and Kim fails to teach the newly recited limitations of claim 1. The arguments underlying this conclusion have been addressed above.
In the upper portion of page 11 of 12 above the heading “Dependent Claims 2-12 and 14-16” the applicant argues that Lee does not remedy the alleged deficiencies of Yao and Kim. Lee is not relied upon for teaching this feature, thus this argument is moot. However, it is worth noting that the features of claim 10, for which Lee is relied upon, corresponds to the carrier 230 of the instant application, from which the overlap in the perpendicular direction also arises. A claim that has a nexus between these two features has not yet been provided.
Under the heading “Dependent Claims 2-12 and 14-16” on page 11 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the dependent claims are allowable at least based on their dependence from claims 1 and 13, and for the additional features they recite. The arguments with respect to claims 1 and 13 have been addressed above. No substantive arguments with respect to the additional features are presented by the applicant, and thus there is nothing to respond to with respect to the features of the dependent claims.
The request for an interview with the examiner in the second paragraph of the Conclusion on page 12 of 12 of the applicant’s remarks is denied. The nature and number of the outstanding issues of patentability are such that it does not appear that an interview would result in expediting allowance of the application at this time. See MPEP §713.01 (IV) “An interview should be had only when the nature of the case is such that the interview could serve to develop and clarify specific issues and lead to a mutual understanding between the examiner and the applicant, and thereby advance the prosecution of the application. … Where a complete reply to a first action includes a request for an interview, the examiner, after consideration of the reply, should grant such an interview request if it appears that the interview would result in expediting the allowance of the application.”
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
Prosecution Insights