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
Response to Amendment
The amendment and the Request for Continuing Examination filed on 11/13/2025 have been entered. Claims 1-19 and 21-23 are now pending in the application. Claims 9, 12 and 13 have been amended, claims 10 and 14 have been canceled and new claims 22 and 23 have been added by the Applicant. Previous double patenting rejections of claim 20 have been withdrawn in light of Applicant’s cancelation of claim 20. Previous double patenting rejections of claims 1-2, 4-8, 11-12, 15 have been withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments to claim 1.
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.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 210, 202, 214.03, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on Continuation of 17034992 , filed 09/28/2020 ,and Continuation of 15537817 , filed 06/19/2017, which is a National Stage entry of PCT/KR2015/013110 , International Filing Date of 12/03/2015 that claims foreign priority to KR 10-2014-0184639, filed 12/19/2014 and claims foreign priority to 10-2015-0004070, filed 01/12/2015.
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
However, to overcome a prior art rejection, applicant(s) must submit a translation of the foreign priority papers in order to perfect the claimed foreign priority because said papers has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP § 213.04
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 16-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-9 and 17-18 U.S. Patent No. US 11579402 B2 in view of Hu et al. (hereafter Hu) US 20150331251 A1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as presented in claim correspondence table below:
Instant application 18159934
U.S. Pat No. US 11579402
Note
16
1
(*)
17
1,2
(+)
18
6,7
19
8
(*) Although US1157904 does not recite that the bobbin “comprising a supporting protrusion protruding from an upper surface of the bobbin” and to which upper elastic member coupled where upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the supporting protrusion of the bobbin. However, such protrusion in upper surface of a bobbin is seen as common feature for coupling the elastic member with the housing as taught by Hu in order to movably support the bobbin on the housing frame (Figs. 1,3-4,6, paragraphs [39-49]). (+) Soldering is considered obvious for electrically connecting two electronic components.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-12 and 15-19, 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hu et al. (hereafter Hu, of record) US 20150331251 A1.
In regard to independent claim 1, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) a lens moving apparatus (lens driving device, see Title, Abstract, paragraphs [02, 07-28, 39-49]) comprising:
a circuit board (circuit board 47, 43, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a housing disposed on the circuit board so as to be spaced apart from the circuit board (e.g. frame 44 on 47 and spaced from 47 and base below 47 depicted in Figs. 1,3-4, see e.g. paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a bobbin disposed in the housing and comprising a supporting protrusion protruding from an upper surface of the bobbin (e.g. lens holder 21 with protrusion(s) on upper surface, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [39-49]);
a first magnet disposed on the housing (autofocus module 20 with magnet 23, also 311, corresponding to driving electromagnetic component 22 coil, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-4, 6);
a first coil disposed on the bobbin (driving electromagnetic component 22 coil on lens holder 21, paragraphs [39-49]);
a position sensor disposed on the bobbin (i.e. position sensor 42 on 21, paragraphs [39-49], note that position sensor 42 and hall sensor magnet 41 are interchangeable between 21 and 44, paragraphs [40, 47]);
an upper elastic member comprising a hole coupled to the supporting protrusion of the bobbin (first conductive elastic bodies 45 with hole(s) coupled to protrusions on 21, as depicted Figs. 1,3-4,6, paragraphs [39-49]);
a conductive pattern disposed on an outer side surface of the bobbin and electrically connecting the position sensor and the upper elastic member ( circuit board 43, Molded Interconnect Device 49 on outer surface of 21 (or 44) connected to 42 and 45, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a second coil disposed under the first magnet so as to face the first magnet in an optical axis direction (coil X-axis driving coil 325 and a Y-axis driving coil 326 of anti-shake module 30 under 311 in optical z-axis direction, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6); and
a supporting member (second conductive elastic bodies 46) electrically connecting the upper elastic member and the circuit board (as first conductive elastic bodies 45 are electrically coupled to the second conductive elastic bodies 46 which are connected to circuit board 47, paragraphs [39-49]),
wherein an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the hole of the upper elastic member (i.e. as an upper surface of 42 is lower than the hole of 45 coupled to protrusion on 21, as clearly depicted in e.g. Figs. 2,3, 5-5, where it is noted that first elastic conductive body 45 is flat planar spring attached to protrusions on holder 21 and frame 44, thus 21 and 44 are at same vertical height, with all other parts of 21 and 44 are below and lower than protrusions with first elastic 45 including the position of upper surface of 42, where the position sensor is shown below the upper rim surface of 44, and correspondingly on 21 as it is interchangeable between 21 and 44, which is clearly seen in Figs. 2 and 3, see also paragraphs [39-49]).
Regarding claim 2, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the position sensor is soldered to one end of the conductive pattern (i.e. as position sensor chip 42 is electrically is disposed and electrically connected to circuit board 43 and 49, or is directly electrically coupled to the Molded Interconnect Device 49, as depicted in Figs. 1-6, paragraphs [40-49], note that
further limitations of claim 2 are directed to method steps of making the device using soldering, and it could have been made using an alternative method such as welding, port welding using conductive epoxy. The method limitations are not germane to patentability pursuant to MPEP §2112.02, since it has been held that “'[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.' In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted).”).
Regarding claim 3, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that another end of the conductive pattern is connected to the upper elastic member (i.e. as other ends of 49 are connected to 45, paragraphs [40-49]), wherein the upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the other end of the conductive pattern (i.e. as 49 can be higher than 42 as depicted in Figs. 2, 3, also due to interchangeability of 41, 42, paragraphs [40, 47]).
Regarding claim 4, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the conductive pattern comprises a plurality of patterns and one end of each of the plurality of patterns is electrically connected to the position sensor (i.e. as 49, 43 with plurality of patterns, with one end connected to 42, as depicted Figs. 3, 5-6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 5, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the upper elastic member comprises a plurality of elastic members connected to the plurality of patterns, respectively (i.e. as 45 has plurality of elastic members connected to plurality of patterns of 49, as depicted Figs. 3, 6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 6, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the supporting member comprises a plurality of supporting members connected to the plurality of elastic members , respectively, (i.e. as second conductive elastic bodies 46 are electrically connected to plurality of 45, as depicted Figs. 3, 6, paragraphs [40-49]), wherein the upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than connecting portions of the plurality of supporting members and the plurality of elastic members (i.e. as 42 can be higher than connecting parts 45 and 46, as depicted in Figs. 2, 3, also due to interchangeability of 41, 42, paragraphs [40-47]).
Regarding claim 7, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the position sensor is disposed to be spaced apart from the first coil in the optical axis direction (i.e. as 42 is spaced from 22 along z-axis, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 8, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that a lower surface of the position sensor is positioned higher than the first coil (i.e. as a lower surface of 42 is higher from 22, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 9, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) comprising a sensing magnet opposite the position sensor and disposed on the housing (i.e. hall sensor magnet 41 on 44, paragraphs [39-49], note that position sensor 42 and hall sensor magnet 41 are interchangeable between 21 and 44, paragraphs [40, 47]) and wherein an upper surface of the sensing magnet is positioned lower than the supporting protrusion of the bobbin (i.e. as an upper surface of 41 is lower than protrusion(s) on 21, as depicted in Figs. 1,3-4,6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 11, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the second coil comprises a circuit member disposed on the circuit board and coils formed in the circuit member (i.e. as driving circuit board of anti-shake module 30 with X, Y displacement coils 325,326, paragraphs [39-46], as depicted in Figs. 1, 3, 4, 6).
Regarding claim 15, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the bobbin comprises a recess in which the position sensor is disposed (i.e. as 42 is in a recess, as depicted in Figs. 5-6, 2-3, also due to interchangeability 42,41, paragraphs [40-49]), and one end of the conductive pattern is disposed in the recess, and the one end of the conductive pattern is connected to the position sensor (i.e. as 42 is on 43 in the recess and connected to 42, paragraphs [40-49]).
In regard to independent claim 16, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) a lens moving apparatus (lens driving device, see Title, Abstract, paragraphs [02, 07-28, 39-49]) comprising:
a circuit board (circuit board 47, 43, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a housing disposed on the circuit board so as to be spaced apart from the circuit board (e.g. frame 44 on 47 and spaced from 47, e.g. paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a bobbin disposed in the housing and comprising a supporting protrusion protruding from an upper surface of the bobbin (e.g. lens holder 21 with protrusion(s) on upper surface, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [39-49]);
a first magnet disposed on the housing (autofocus module 20 with magnet 23, also 311, corresponding to driving electromagnetic component 22 coil, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-4, 6);
a first coil disposed on the bobbin (driving electromagnetic component 22 coil on lens holder 21, paragraphs [39-49]);
a position sensor disposed on the bobbin (i.e. position sensor 42 on 21, paragraphs [39-49], note that position sensor 42 and hall sensor magnet 41 are interchangeable between 21 and 44, paragraphs [40, 47]);
an upper elastic member coupled to the supporting protrusion of the bobbin ( first conductive elastic bodies 45 coupled to protrusions on 21, as depicted Figs. 1,3-4,6, paragraphs [39-49]);
a conductive pattern disposed on an outer side surface of the bobbin and electrically connecting the position sensor and the upper elastic member ( circuit board 43, Molded Interconnect Device 49 on outer surface of 21 (or 44) connected to 42 and 45, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6); and
a supporting member (second conductive elastic bodies 46, Figs. 1,3-4,6) comprising one end coupled to the upper elastic member and an other end electrically connected to the circuit board (as first conductive elastic bodies 45 are electrically coupled to one end of the second conductive elastic bodies 46 and other end of 46 cooled to circuit board 47, paragraphs [39-49]), wherein an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the one end of the supporting member (i.e. given that an upper surface of 42 lower than one end of 46 that is connecting parts 45 and 46 and one end of 46 is extending above planar first elastic 45, as clearly depicted in Figs. 2, 3, and also due to interchangeability of 41, 42, where it is noted that first elastic conductive body 45 is flat planar spring attached to protrusions on holder 21 and frame 44, thus 21 and 44 are at same vertical height, with all other parts of 21 and 44 below and lower than respective top surfaces with protrusions having first elastic 45, where the position sensor is shown below the upper rim surface of 44, and correspondingly on 21 as it is interchangeable between 21 and 44, which is clearly seen in Figs. 2 and 3, paragraphs [39-49]).
Regarding claim 17, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that one end of the conductive pattern is soldered to the position sensor and an other end of the conductive pattern is soldered to the upper elastic member (i.e. as position sensor chip 42 is electrically is disposed and electrically connected to one end of circuit board 43 and 49, or is directly electrically coupled to the Molded Interconnect Device 49, as depicted in Figs. 1-6, paragraphs [40-49], and other end(s) of 49 are connected to 45, paragraphs [40-49], where it is noted that further limitations of claim 2 are directed to method steps of making the device using soldering, and it could have been made using an alternative method such as welding, port welding using conductive epoxy. The method limitations are not germane to patentability pursuant to MPEP §2112.02, since it has been held that “'[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.' In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted).”).
Regarding claim 18, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the upper elastic member comprises a plurality of elastic members spaced apart from each other (i.e. as 45 has plurality of elastic members spaced apart, as depicted Figs. 1,3, 4, 6, paragraphs [40-49]), and the conductive pattern comprises a plurality of patterns corresponding to the plurality of elastic members (i.e. as 49, 43 with plurality of patterns, corresponding to plurality of 45, as depicted Figs. 1, 3, 4-6, paragraphs [40-49]), and wherein each of the plurality of patterns is electrically connected to the corresponding one of the plurality of elastic members (i.e. as each of 45 plurality of elastic members is connected to plurality of patterns of 49, as depicted Figs. 3, 6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 19, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the position sensor is disposed to be spaced apart from the first coil (i.e. as 42 is spaced from 22 along z-axis, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [40-49]).
and a lower surface of the position sensor is positioned higher than the first coil(i.e. as a lower surface of 42 is higher from 22, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [40-49]).
Regarding claim 21, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) a camera module (picture-taking module of picture-taking device with the tri-axis anti-shake structures as lens driving device, paragraphs [02-05, 8-9, 38-40]) comprising:
a lens (lens 11, paragraphs [37-38, 45]);
a lens moving apparatus according to claim 1 (i.e. as picture-taking module of picture-taking device includes the tri-axis anti-shake structures i.e. lens driving device of claim 1 see above, paragraphs [02-05, 8-9, 38-40]); and
an image sensor ( i.e. as picture-taking module of picture-taking device includes image sensor, i.e. image sensing component for taking pictures, images, paragraphs [02-05, 8-9, 38-40]).
Regarding claim 23, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that the support member and the electrical conduction member are disposed at a corner of the housing (as supports 46 and connecting parts of first conductive elastic bodies 45 electrically coupled to the second conductive 46 are disposed at a corner of frame 44, base, external frame 10, see paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1,3-4).
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 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (hereafter Hu, of record) US 20150331251 A1 in view of Sato et al. (hereafter Sato, of record, see IDS 01/11/2023) US 20130050828 A1.
Regarding claim 12, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) comprising a lower elastic member coupled to a lower portion of the bobbin and a lower portion of the housing (i.e. as lower elastic of autofocus module 20, and second conductive elastic body 46, coupled to frame lower portion of lens holder 21, and coupled to base below 47 frame 44 and holder 21 via 45 and holder 21 portions, depicted in Figs. 1, 3, 4, paragraphs [39-47]),
wherein the first coil is configured to move the bobbin in an optical axis direction by an interaction with the first magnet (as Z-(optical) axis driving electromagnetic component 22 coil on lens holder 21 interacting with magnet 23 of autofocus module 20, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-4),
wherein the lower elastic member comprises a lower spring (i.e. as lower elastic of 20 is plate spring same as the upper elastic 45, and elastic conductive 46 are slings, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-4) conductively connected to the first coil (as at least conductive 46 are connected to 22 via conductive 45, paragraphs [42-49]), and wherein the upper elastic member comprises an upper spring (i.e. as 45 is plate spring(s) paragraphs [42,49]), but is silent that it (45) is connected to the lower spring (lower 46, lower elastic of 20) by an electrical conduction member.
However, Sato further teaches that upper elastic member comprises an upper spring (i.e. as leaf springs 32 paragraphs [100-10742,49]), connected to the lower spring (lower 16, paragraphs [105-106], Figs. 3, 19) by an electrical conduction member (i.e. by solder 60, paragraphs [107,183, 206-209], Figs. 3, 19-20).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify electrical conduction member (e.g.
Solder) connecting upper spring and lower spring support suspension wires of Hu according to teachings of Sato for electrically connecting and coupling supporting member with upper elastic member of Hu in order to provide electrical connection between different electric/electronic components (see Sato paragraphs [107,183, 206-209]).
Regarding claim 13, Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) that one end of the supporting member is coupled to the upper elastic member (i.e. as one end of 46 is electrically coupled to first conductive elastic bodies 45, paragraphs [42-49]), and wherein the upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the one end of the supporting member (i.e. as an upper surface of 42 is lower than one end of 46, as depicted in Figs. 1,3-4,6, paragraphs [40-49]), but Hu is silent that it is coupled by a solder. However, Sato further teaches that one end of the supporting member is coupled to the upper elastic member by a solder (i.e. as support suspension wire 16 has upper end 162 coupled to upper portion 328a of upper leaf spring 32 by solder 60, to electrically connect components e.g. focusing coil, printed circuit, with see paragraphs [107,183, 206-209]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify solder connecting support suspension wires and elastic leaf spring according to teachings of Sato for electrically connecting and coupling supporting member with upper elastic member of Hu in order to provide electrical connection between different electric/electronic components (see Sato paragraphs [107,183, 206-209]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 is 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the Remarks dated 11/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant argues on page 8-9 that the cited prior art of Hu does not disclose that (1) “an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the hole of the upper elastic member” and similarly for claim 16 that “wherein an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the one end of the supporting member” because allegedly sensor 42 and sensing magnet 41 are not interchangeable given that Hu only discloses that the circuit board 43 and Hall sensing magnet 41 can be interchanged and not the Hall position sensor 42 and the Hall sensing magnet 41 allegedly due to the shapes of 41, and 42 in annotated Fig. 3, as they are different and the alternative placement of 41 and 42 would allegedly not fit, and additionally since in Fig. 6 that needs to be considered the sensor 42 is higher than elastic 45. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. With respect to issue (1), as noted in the rejection above, the cited prior art of Hu teaches all limitations of claims 1 and 16, as Hu teaches (see Figs.1-6) a lens moving apparatus (lens driving device, see Title, Abstract, paragraphs [02, 07-28, 39-49]) comprising:
a circuit board (circuit board 47, 43, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a housing disposed on the circuit board so as to be spaced apart from the circuit board (e.g. frame 44 on 47 and spaced from 47, e.g. paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a bobbin disposed in the housing and comprising a supporting protrusion protruding from an upper surface of the bobbin (e.g. lens holder 21 with protrusion(s) on upper surface, as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-6, paragraphs [39-49]);
a first magnet disposed on the housing (autofocus module 20 with magnet 23, also 311, corresponding to driving electromagnetic component 22 coil, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-4, 6);
a first coil disposed on the bobbin (driving electromagnetic component 22 coil on lens holder 21, paragraphs [39-49]);
a position sensor disposed on the bobbin (i.e. position sensor 42 on 21, paragraphs [39-49], note that position sensor 42 and hall sensor magnet 41 are interchangeable between 21 and 44, paragraphs [40, 47]);
an upper elastic member comprising a hole coupled to the supporting protrusion of the bobbin (first conductive elastic bodies 45 with hole(s) coupled to protrusions on 21, as depicted Figs. 1,3-4,6, paragraphs [39-49]);
a conductive pattern disposed on an outer side surface of the bobbin and electrically connecting the position sensor and the upper elastic member ( circuit board 43, Molded Interconnect Device 49 on outer surface of 21 (or 44) connected to 42 and 45, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6);
a second coil disposed under the first magnet so as to face the first magnet in an optical axis direction (coil X-axis driving coil 325 and a Y-axis driving coil 326 of anti-shake module 30 under 311 in optical z-axis direction, paragraphs [39-49], Figs. 1-6); and
a supporting member (second conductive elastic bodies 46) electrically connecting the upper elastic member and the circuit board (as first conductive elastic bodies 45 are electrically coupled to the second conductive elastic bodies 46 which are connected to circuit board 47, paragraphs [39-49]),
wherein an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the hole of the upper elastic member (i.e. as an upper surface of 42 is lower than the hole of 45 coupled to protrusion on 21, as clearly depicted in e.g. Figs. 2,3, 5-5, where it is noted that first elastic conductive body 45 is flat planar spring attached to protrusions on holder 21 and frame 44, thus 21 and 44 are at same vertical height, with all other parts of 21 and 44 are below and lower than protrusions with first elastic 45 including the position of upper surface of 42, where the position sensor is shown below the upper rim surface of 44, and correspondingly on 21 as it is interchangeable between 21 and 44, which is clearly seen in Figs. 2 and 3, see also paragraphs [39-49]).
Similarly for claim 16 Hu teaches wherein an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the one end of the supporting member (i.e. given that an upper surface of 42 lower than one end of 46 that is connecting parts 45 and 46 and one end of 46 is extending above planar first elastic 45, as clearly depicted in Figs. 2, 3, and also due to interchangeability of 41, 42, where it is noted that first elastic conductive body 45 is flat planar spring attached to protrusions on holder 21 and frame 44, thus 21 and 44 are at same vertical height, with all other parts of 21 and 44 below and lower than respective top surfaces with protrusions having first elastic 45, where the position sensor is shown below the upper rim surface of 44, and correspondingly on 21 as it is interchangeable between 21 and 44, which is clearly seen in Figs. 2 and 3, paragraphs [39-49]).
Furthermore, the embodiment of Figs. 1-3 of Hu was used to describe and teach that above recited arrangement of the claim elements. Moreover, paragraph [0040] of Hu recites:
“[0040] To enable the optical autofocus module 20 to perform autofocus, a Z-axis position sensor 42 disposed on a circuit board 43 operates in conjunction with a Hall sensor magnet 41 to sense a change in the magnetic field and thus measure a change in the Z-axis position of the lens. The Z-axis position sensor 42 sends at least a driving compensation signal to a Molded Interconnect Device 49 of a frame 44 through the circuit board 43. In this embodiment, the circuit board 43 is disposed on the frame 44, and the Hall sensor magnet 41 is disposed on a lens holder 21. However, in the spirit able to complete the creation of the present invention, the circuit board 43 and the Hall sensing magnet 41 is not limited to this configuration, for example, the circuit board 43 disposed on the lens holder 21, and the Hall sensing magnet 41 disposed on the frame 44.”
Here, Hu specifically, teaches that sensor 42 disposed on a circuit board 43. Hence sensor 42 goes with the placement of circuit board 43. Further the positions of sensor 42 and magnet 41 are specifically arranged as sensor 42 on board 43 operates in conjunction with the Hall sensor magnet 41 to sense a change in the magnetic field and thus measure a change in the Z-axis position of the lens. Hu discloses that circuit board 43 with sensor 42 is disposed on the frame 44, and the Hall sensor magnet 41 is disposed on a lens holder 21. However, Hu also teaches that the invention is not limited to that arrangement, since the circuit board 43 with the sensor 421 and the Hall sensing magnet 41 is not limited to this configuration, as the circuit board 43 with Hall sensor 42 disposed on the lens holder 21, and the Hall sensing magnet 41 disposed on the frame 44. This configuration also requires that the sensor 42 on board 43 operates in conjunction with the Hall sensor magnet 41 to sense a change in the magnetic field and thus measure a change in the Z-axis position of the lens. On the other hand Hu does not disclose any impossibility of this arrangement due to specific sizes or shapes of the Hall magnet 41 and Hall sensor 42. Hu does not provide specific teachings and requirements of the shape or size of 41 and 42 elements. Hu discloses that molded parts such as lens holder 212 and frame are made to accommodate magnetic sensing components, as shown in Figs. 3 and 6.
Similarly for claim 16 Hu teaches wherein an upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the one end of the supporting member (i.e. given that an upper surface of 42 lower than one end of 46 that is connecting parts 45 and 46 and one end of 46 is extending above planar first elastic 45, as clearly depicted in Figs. 2, 3, and also due to interchangeability of 41, 42 as 42 is on 43, as discussed above, where it is noted that first elastic conductive body 45 is flat planar spring attached to protrusions on holder 21 and frame 44, thus 21 and 44 are at same vertical height, with all other parts of 21 and 44 below and lower than respective top surfaces with protrusions having first elastic 45, where the position sensor is shown below the upper rim surface of 44, and correspondingly on 21 as it is interchangeable between 21 and 44, which is clearly seen in Figs. 2 and 3, paragraphs [39-49]).
Specifically, Hu thus teaches that the upper surface of the position sensor is positioned lower than the hole of the upper elastic member (i.e. as an upper surface of 42 is lower than the hole of 45 coupled to protrusion on 21, as clearly depicted in e.g. Figs. 2,3, 5-5, where it is noted that first elastic conductive body 45 is flat planar spring attached to protrusions on holder 21 and frame 44, thus 21 and 44 are at same vertical height, with all other parts of 21 and 44 are below and lower than protrusions with first elastic 45 including the position of upper surface of 42, where the position sensor is shown below the upper rim surface of 44, and correspondingly on 21 as it is interchangeable between 21 and 44, which is clearly seen in Figs. 2 and 3, see also paragraphs [39-49]). Hu also teaches that 41 and 42 are interchangeable with positions on frame 44 and holder 21, since 42 is attached to 43 circuit board, and goes with the circuit board. It is unclear how would the sensing mechanism function if 42 is not with 43, or if 41 and 42 are on same part e.g. on 44 or 21 (see entirety of paragraphs [40-41]). Regarding assertion that recited conductive pattern is different from a circuit board, e.g. circuit board 43, it is unclear how and why is a conductive pattern different from a circuit board, when a circuit board includes circuits which are conductive patterns. There are no additional limitations differentiating conductive pattern in terms of any other aspects, structures or functions from the matching circuit board item. Lastly the above rejections are based on embodiment depicted in Figs. 1-3, with details shown clearly in Figs. 2-3. The structures and details of Fig. 6 were not relied upon for disclosing the limitations of claims 1 and 16, including the issues noted under (1) above.
The same answers regarding the vertical positioning of elements in the disclosure of Hu also apply to the remaining double patenting rejections presented above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Lastly, claim 22 is 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.
No additional substantial arguments were presented after page 9 of the Remarks dated 11/13/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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 K 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872