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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/22/2026 (claims) and 6/24/2026 has been entered.
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-11 are pending in this application.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8 and 10-11 have been amended [5/22/2026].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 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 based on newly applied references Maeda et al. (US-2021/0289096) and Fujimoto et al. (US-2001/0028506).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US-2021/0289096) in view of Fujimoto et al. (US-2001/0028506).
As to Claim 1, Maeda teaches ‘An optical device comprising: a light guiding unit that emits light to be guided to a predetermined position from a light emitting aperture [Fig 9 (110), par 0077- 0080 – light guide bodies emitting light toward an upper surface of light collecting member]; a detection unit that receives light reflected at the predetermined position [Fig 9 (126), par 0085 – light receiving elements]’.
Maeda does not disclose expressly ‘a light blocking unit that includes a light blocking base and a pair of light blocking walls disposed between the predetermined position and the light blocking base, the pair of light blocking walls being located closer than an imaginary line to the detection unit in a cross section including the predetermined position and the light guiding unit, the imaginary line connecting the predetermined position and an end of the light emitting aperture that is far from the predetermined position in an optical axis direction, wherein the pair of light blocking walls extends extend above a highest portion of the light guiding unit’.
Maeda teaches light-shielding member is placed on a pair of upward surfaces from above and light-shielding portions extending in the apparatus depth direction to the housing where light guide bodies emitting light at the light-shielding members [Figs 9 (150, 060, 110), 11 (150), par 0099, 0107, 0126-0129].
While, Fujimoto teaches light shield (i.e., light blocking unit) is formed with upper and lower surface (i.e., light blocking base) an upward projection at each end (i.e., pair of light blocking walls) [Figs 1, 2 (3, 31a, 31b, 37), par 0065-0067].
Maeda in view of Fujimoto teaches ‘a light blocking unit that includes a light blocking base and a pair of light blocking walls disposed between the predetermined position and the light blocking base, the pair of light blocking walls being located closer than an imaginary line to the detection unit in a cross section including the predetermined position and the light guiding unit, the imaginary line connecting the predetermined position and an end of the light emitting aperture that is far from the predetermined position in an optical axis direction, wherein the pair of light blocking walls extends extend above a highest portion of the light guiding unit [Maeda: Figs 9 (150, 060, 110), 11 (150), par 0099, 0107, 0126-0129; Fujimoto: Figs 1, 2 (3, 31a, 31b, 37), par 0065-0067]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
As to Claim 2, Maeda in view of Fujimoto teaches ‘wherein the light blocking unit includes an edge portion that allows light reflected at the predetermined position and travelling toward the detection unit to pass through the edge portion and that does not allow light reflected at another position different from the predetermined position and travelling toward the detection unit to enter the edge portion [Maeda: par 0095, 0142-0148 – light emitted from light guide body is irradiated and reflected to light receiving element passing through through-hole of light-shielding portions of light-shielding member; Fujimoto: Fig 8, par 0079-0082 – light guide emits light and light receiving elements receives light through the upward projections on each end of the light shield]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2.
As to Claim 3, Fujimoto in the proposed combination teaches ‘wherein the edge portion is formed integrally with the pair of light blocking walls [Fig 8, par 0079-0082 – light guide emits light and light receiving elements receives light through the upward projections on each end of the light shield]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3.
As to Claim 4, Fujimoto in the proposed combination teaches ‘wherein a lens on which light reflected at the predetermined position is incident is mounted on a member including the edge portion and the pair of light blocking walls integrally formed with each other [Fig 8 (33, U1), par 0008, 0058, 0065-0066 – light shield including upward projections mounted on the first lens array]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
As to Claim 5, Fujimoto in the proposed combination teaches ‘wherein a member including the edge portion and the light blocking member pair of light blocking walls integrally formed with each other has a recess for mounting a lens on which light reflected at the predetermined position is incident onto the member [Fig 8 (33, U1), par 0008, 0058, 0065-0066 – light shield including upward projections mounted on the first lens array]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
As to Claim 6, Fujimoto in the proposed combination teaches ‘wherein the edge portion and the pair of light blocking walls are formed on a surface of a transparent member [Fig 1 (37, 3, 10, 11), par 0058-0059, 0099, 0105 – upward projections on ends of light shield are formed on transparent first holder integral with first lens]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
As to Claim 7, Fujimoto in the proposed combination teaches ‘wherein the edge portion has an inner surface facing toward the detection unit [Fig 8, par 0079-0082 – light guide emits light and light receiving elements receives light through the upward projections on each end of the light shield facing the light receiving elements]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7.
As to Claim 8, Fujimoto in the proposed combination teaches ‘wherein the pair of light blocking walls are formed on two adjacent surfaces of a transparent member [Fig 1 (37, 3, 10, 11), par 0058-0059, 0099, 0105 – upward projections on ends of light shield are formed on transparent first holder integral with first lens]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 8.
As to Claim 9, Fujimoto teaches ‘wherein the two adjacent surfaces form an obtuse angle [Fig 1 (37) – upward projections formed at each end of light shield]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
As to Claim 10, Maeda teaches ‘An image reading device comprising: a light guiding unit that emits light to be guided to an image reading position from a light emitting aperture [Fig 9 (110), par 0063-0066, 0077- 0080 – light guide bodies emitting light toward an upper surface of light collecting member to read an image of document placed on transparent plate]; a detection unit that receives light reflected at the image reading position [Fig 9 (126), par 0085 – light receiving elements]’.
Maeda does not disclose expressly ‘a light blocking unit that includes a light blocking base and a pair of light blocking walls disposed between the image reading position and the light blocking base, the pair of light blocking walls being located closer than an imaginary line to the detection unit in a cross section including the image reading position and the light guiding unit, the imaginary line connecting the image reading position and an end of the light emitting aperture that is far from the image reading position in an optical axis direction, wherein the pair of light blocking walls extends extend above a highest portion of the light guiding unit’.
Maeda teaches light-shielding member is placed on a pair of upward surfaces from above and light-shielding portions extending in the apparatus depth direction to the housing where light guide bodies emitting light at the light-shielding members for reading a document on a transparent plate [Figs 9 (150, 060, 110), 11 (150), par 0063-0066, 0099, 0107, 0126-0129].
While, Fujimoto teaches light shield (i.e., light blocking unit) is formed with upper and lower surface (i.e., light blocking base) an upward projection at each end (i.e., pair of light blocking walls) [Figs 1, 2 (3, 31a, 31b, 37), par 0065-0067].
Maeda in view of Fujimoto teaches ‘a light blocking unit that includes a light blocking base and a pair of light blocking walls disposed between the image reading position and the light blocking base, the pair of light blocking walls being located closer than an imaginary line to the detection unit in a cross section including the image reading position and the light guiding unit, the imaginary line connecting the image reading position and an end of the light emitting aperture that is far from the image reading position in an optical axis direction, wherein the pair of light blocking walls extends extend above a highest portion of the light guiding unit [Maeda: Figs 9 (150, 060, 110), 11 (150), par 0063-0066, 0099, 0107, 0126-0129; Fujimoto: Figs 1, 2 (3, 31a, 31b, 37), par 0065-0067]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 10.
As to Claim 11, Maeda teaches ‘An optical device comprising: a light guiding means for emitting light to be guided to a predetermined position from a light emitting aperture [Fig 9 (110), par 0077- 0080 – light guide bodies emitting light toward an upper surface of light collecting member]; a detection means for receiving light reflected at the predetermined position [Fig 9 (126), par 0085 – light receiving elements]’.
Maeda does not disclose expressly ‘a light blocking unit including a light blocking base and a pair of light blocking walls disposed between the predetermined position and the light blocking base, the pair of light blocking walls being located closer than an imaginary line to the detection means in a cross section including the predetermined position and the light guiding means, the imaginary line connecting the predetermined position and an end of the light emitting aperture that is far from the predetermined position in an optical axis direction, wherein the pair of light blocking walls extends extend above a highest portion of the light guiding means’.
Maeda teaches light-shielding member is placed on a pair of upward surfaces from above and light-shielding portions extending in the apparatus depth direction to the housing where light guide bodies emitting light at the light-shielding members [Figs 9 (150, 060, 110), 11 (150), par 0099, 0107, 0126-0129].
While, Fujimoto teaches light shield (i.e., light blocking unit) is formed with upper and lower surface (i.e., light blocking base) an upward projection at each end (i.e., pair of light blocking walls) [Figs 1, 2 (3, 31a, 31b, 37), par 0065-0067].
Maeda in view of Fujimoto teaches ‘a light blocking unit including a light blocking base and a pair of light blocking walls disposed between the predetermined position and the light blocking base, the pair of light blocking walls being located closer than an imaginary line to the detection means in a cross section including the predetermined position and the light guiding means, the imaginary line connecting the predetermined position and an end of the light emitting aperture that is far from the predetermined position in an optical axis direction, wherein the pair of light blocking walls extends extend above a highest portion of the light guiding means [Maeda: Figs 9 (150, 060, 110), 11 (150), par 0099, 0107, 0126-0129; Fujimoto: Figs 1, 2 (3, 31a, 31b, 37), par 0065-0067]’.
Maeda and Fujimoto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely image data reading devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include upward projections, as taught by Fujimoto with Maeda’s light-shielding member. The motivation for doing so would have been to forming a true image of an object with simpler and less expensive optical means. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fujimoto with Maeda to obtain the invention as specified in claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record
a. US Publication No. 2021/0289096
b. US Publication No. 2001/0028506
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIYA J CATO whose telephone number is (571)270-3954. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 830-530.
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, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached at 571.270.3438. 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.
/MIYA J CATO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights