DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant alleges that Kubo does not teach “a second end of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire is connected to the second part”, the applicant is respectfully reminded that, while it might be evident, by comparing the patented structure of Kubo with the instant specification and drawings, that the claimed invention is different from the Prior Art made of record, that is not the test for patentability. Rather, it is the language of the claims what defines the meets and bounds of the instant invention. In this case, Kubo teaches a second end of the first segment (the electrodes 31a, 31b) is connected to the second part via the intermediate parts (the electrodes 31a, 31b are connected to the base member 51, which is also connected to the lens assembly 10, i.e. second part, via the driving member assembly 20 and the lens support portion 12). Furthermore, the Examiner notes that the claim, as recited, does not explicitly require the second end of the first segment of the SMA wire to be directly connected to the second part.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kubo et al. (US Pub. No. 2007/0280668).
Regarding claims 1-4, 6-7 and 9-11, Kubo teaches a shape memory alloy actuator comprising:
a first part (51);
a second part (10);
one or more heat sinks (lens unit, e.g. 11-13 and other supporting structures 53, 54 can act as heatsink dissipating heat away from the SMA wires); and
one or more shape memory alloy wires (30), comprising a first segment of shape memory alloy wire, wherein the one or more shape memory alloy wires are configured to move the second part relative to the first part over a range of movement;
the first segment of shape memory alloy wire is connected to the first part by a first resilient element at a first end (Fig. 3, one end of the SMA wire 30 is connected to the driving member 20 at the guide piece 211), and a second end of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire is connected to the second part (the electrodes 31a, 31b are connected to the base member 51, which is connected to the lens unit 10 via the driving assembly 20 and the lens support portion 12, para. 71); and
the first resilient element is configured such that in response to a change in tension of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire, a first distance between the first segment of shape memory alloy wire and at least one of the heat sinks is increased or decreased by an amount greater than a change in a second distance between the first and second ends (Fig. 7, para. 86-87).
wherein the one or more shape memory alloy wires are configured to move at least one of the second part relative to the first part over the range of movement or the first part relative to the second part over the range of movement (para. 88) [claim 2];
wherein the first resilient element comprises a portion extending in a direction oriented at an angle of less than or equal to 45 degrees to the second distance (the driving member 20 has a portion that oriented at angle of roughly 45 degrees relative to the direction of the second distance, Fig. 7) [claim 3];
PNG
media_image1.png
504
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the second end of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire is connected to the second part by a second resilient element; and the second resilient element comprises a portion extending in a direction that is oriented at an angle of less than or equal to 45 degrees with the second distance (see annotated Fig. 3) [claim 4];
wherein a change in the first distance corresponding to the movement away from a first heat sink of the one or more heat sink and toward a second heat sink of the one or more heat sink (Fig. 3, the change in the first distance equates to moving the lens unit 10 away from the first heat sink 53b and closer to the second heat sink 53a) [claim 6];
wherein at least one of the first part and the second part comprises at least one of the heat sink (Fig. 3) [claim 7];
wherein the one or more shape memory alloy wires include one or more further segments of shape memory alloy wire, each further segment of shape memory alloy wire being identically configured to the first segment of shape memory alloy wire (Fig. 3) [claim 9];
the one or more shape memory alloy wires include the first segment of shape memory alloy wire and a second segment of shape memory alloy wire (Figs. 20A-20B, items 30D, 30E); wherein the second segment of shape memory alloy wire is configured to oppose the first segment of shape memory alloy wire, tensions of the first and second segments of shape memory alloy wire are variable independently of the position of the second part over at least a portion of the range of movement [claim 10]; and
a second resilient element (20B) configured to oppose the first segment of the shape memory wire (Fig. 24) [claim 11].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13, 16-18, 20, 23-27 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 12, applicant has sufficiently defined and claimed an apparatus, whereby the prior art does not teach or suggest a controller configured to: control a cooling rate of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire by adjusting the tension of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire, wherein: moving the first segment of shape memory alloy wire towards at least one of the heat sinks increases the cooling rate; and moving the first segment of shape memory alloy wire away from at least one of the heat sinks decreases the cooling rate, in combination with all other limitations set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 23, applicant has sufficiently defined and claimed a method of controlling a shape memory alloy actuator, whereby the prior art does not teach or suggest controlling a cooling rate of a first segment of shape memory alloy wire by adjusting a tension of the first segment of shape memory alloy wire, wherein moving the first segment of shape memory alloy wire towards at least one of the heat sinks increases the cooling rate; and moving the first segment of shape memory alloy wire away from at least one of the heat sinks decreases the cooling rate, in combination with all other limitations set forth in the claim.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH Q PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3898. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
MINH Q. PHAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2852
/MINH Q PHAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852